Viktor Bout Sentenced To 25 Years

[MAJIC]

This man was an International purveyor of instruments of Death, who cared for nothing,or no one, except making himself rich.

Save your sympathies for more deserving causes,

[personchester]

Only 25 years after all the people who have been murdered with illegal weapons that he sold?

and how many has the USA sold...?

Not comparable, the US is a state, Bout an individual trader, hence the guilty verdict.

[Unkomoncents]

Actually there is double hypocrisy here:

1) The US happily supplied arms to the mujahadeen in Afghanistan during the USSR invasion - a fact that has come back to haunt them ever since;

2) Why wasn't Oliver North - America's most famous arms peddlar - prosecuted for supplying arms to Iran? I suppose the fact that he did it on behalf of the US regime at the time meant he was untouchable.

Because Victor Bout wasn't American, nor did he work for the US government in any capacity. The American government works for itself and the American people first. The US is not, nor was it meant to be, some purveyor of objective justice for all people in the world. It's incredibly ironic that people accuse the US of wrongly involving itself in everyone elses' affairs and then expect America to duly prosecute Americans (on behalf of Iran, in this case) who caused injustices in other countries. Either the US is responsible for the wellbeing of the world, or it's not (if not, then it's implied that the US acts for its interests regardless of those of other countries). It can hardly be both ways. And, for the record, this is not an endorsement of the US in ANY capacity. In any event, as some others have noted, Viktor Bout was no saint. The man belongs in a cell, and if America was the only country that had the wherewithall to do it, so be it.

Edited April 6, 2012 by Unkomoncents

[personchester]

Only 25 years after all the people who have been murdered with illegal weapons that he sold?

Are you kidding me??? This guy has sold weapons for the U.S where the U.S couldn't be seen selling weapons to certain countries. He's been in business with them all along, and now they crucify him for whatever reason! Besides how many people are killed by American soldiers on a daily basis all over the world in the name of OIL!!! The American government has killed more people than any other nation on this planet!!!

No, I think Germany, Russia, China are ahead by millions.

That is correct under the leadership of the following despots ... Hitler (Germany) Stalin (Russia) Mao Zedong (China)

[ExpatOilWorker]

Only 25 years after all the people who have been murdered with illegal weapons that he sold?

Are you kidding me??? This guy has sold weapons for the U.S where the U.S couldn't be seen selling weapons to certain countries. He's been in business with them all along, and now they crucify him for whatever reason! Besides how many people are killed by American soldiers on a daily basis all over the world in the name of OIL!!! The American government has killed more people than any other nation on this planet!!!

No, I think Germany, Russia, China are ahead by millions.

That is correct under the leadership of the following despots ... Hitler (Germany) Stalin (Russia) Mao Zedong (China)

Killing 1 person and it is murder, killing millions and it is just statistic.

[khunken]

Actually there is double hypocrisy here:

1) The US happily supplied arms to the mujahadeen in Afghanistan during the USSR invasion - a fact that has come back to haunt them ever since;

2) Why wasn't Oliver North - America's most famous arms peddlar - prosecuted for supplying arms to Iran? I suppose the fact that he did it on behalf of the US regime at the time meant he was untouchable.

Because Victor Bout wasn't American, nor did he work for the US government in any capacity. The American government works for itself and the American people first. The US is not, nor was it meant to be, some purveyor of objective justice for all people in the world. It's incredibly ironic that people accuse the US of wrongly involving itself in everyone elses' affairs and then expect America to duly prosecute Americans (on behalf of Iran, in this case) who caused injustices in other countries. Either the US is responsible for the wellbeing of the world, or it's not (if not, then it's implied that the US acts for its interests regardless of those of other countries). It can hardly be both ways. And, for the record, this is not an endorsement of the US in ANY capacity. In any event, as some others have noted, Viktor Bout was no saint. The man belongs in a cell, and if America was the only country that had the wherewithall to do it, so be it.

Actually he DID work for the US. The US often claims it is working for the wellbeing of the world when it is really working for its own interests. This is a part of the hypocrisy. Supplying arms to Iran is not an Iranian problem - it was illegal in US law just the same as supposedly supplying arms to the FARC or any other group.

I am not a fan of Mr Bout but he was summarily handed over to the US by the Thai government when it looked like the Thai legal system was likely to acquit him (a second time). I also don't believe he got a fair trial in the US as well as being treated abysmally in custody.

[chuckd]

The US had him extradited illegally because the Russians have already succeeded in buying off half each of the local governments of Pattaya and Phuket. The Thai judiciary has clearly demonstrated a long history of failure to be impartial and independent. If the United States could have successfully guaranteed a transparent extradition hearing for Bout in which all deciding parties avoided peddling influence, I'm sure the US would have done that. There's no logical reason to freely give Russia ammunition for diplomatic tension. If Bout had been successfully captured in UK, Australia or Europe, you can be sure the extradition hearing would have occurred and been legal.

Please provide a list of laws that were broken with the Thai extradition of Bout to the US.

Your last sentence is redundant since Bout was NOT arrested in either of the three legal domains you have listed. The laws there have no bearing on this topic.

Why don't YOU provide proof that there weren't a series of laws broken?! What kind of inane request is that?! Also, the article clearly uses the words "extradited" and "illegally" (which, for most, would be enough evidence to suggest that laws WERE broken) so, as far as this topic is concerned, I'm discussing what was said in the article. If you have a problem, then it's with the article, not with what I said. Also, the word "redundant" actually means unnecessarily repetitive (which I clearly wasn't); what you meant to say is that, because Bout wasn't arrested in the US, Australia or the UK, I was mistaken (in my thinking, and not "redundant") to assert that in some other specific jurisdictions, the result of this might have been different. I know where Bout was arrested but thanks for the update!

I don't need to provide proof of your statement. This is a discussion forum and the general practice lies with the person making claims to be able to back them up.

And I think the use of "redundant" is appropriate. After all you, admittedly, did repeat an assertion made by RUSSIAN government controlled television that a RUSSIAN arms dealer had been arrested illegally.

Don't you ever question the sources of your information?

[SanSaiExPat]

Good Riddance. They could take a few more criminal Russians out of Thailand and it would improve things a great deal. This conviction is "one for the good guys." Hip, Hip, Hooray!

[SanSaiExPat]

Actually there is double hypocrisy here:

1) The US happily supplied arms to the mujahadeen in Afghanistan during the USSR invasion - a fact that has come back to haunt them ever since;

2) Why wasn't Oliver North - America's most famous arms peddlar - prosecuted for supplying arms to Iran? I suppose the fact that he did it on behalf of the US regime at the time meant he was untouchable.

Because Victor Bout wasn't American, nor did he work for the US government in any capacity. The American government works for itself and the American people first. The US is not, nor was it meant to be, some purveyor of objective justice for all people in the world. It's incredibly ironic that people accuse the US of wrongly involving itself in everyone elses' affairs and then expect America to duly prosecute Americans (on behalf of Iran, in this case) who caused injustices in other countries. Either the US is responsible for the wellbeing of the world, or it's not (if not, then it's implied that the US acts for its interests regardless of those of other countries). It can hardly be both ways. And, for the record, this is not an endorsement of the US in ANY capacity. In any event, as some others have noted, Viktor Bout was no saint. The man belongs in a cell, and if America was the only country that had the wherewithall to do it, so be it.

Actually he DID work for the US. The US often claims it is working for the wellbeing of the world when it is really working for its own interests. This is a part of the hypocrisy. Supplying arms to Iran is not an Iranian problem - it was illegal in US law just the same as supposedly supplying arms to the FARC or any other group.

I am not a fan of Mr Bout but he was summarily handed over to the US by the Thai government when it looked like the Thai legal system was likely to acquit him (a second time). I also don't believe he got a fair trial in the US as well as being treated abysmally in custody.

You might not be a fan of Mr Bout but you are a "useful idiot" for the "Let's all blindly Hate America" Russian Propaganda Machine."

[Unkomoncents]

The US had him extradited illegally because the Russians have already succeeded in buying off half each of the local governments of Pattaya and Phuket. The Thai judiciary has clearly demonstrated a long history of failure to be impartial and independent. If the United States could have successfully guaranteed a transparent extradition hearing for Bout in which all deciding parties avoided peddling influence, I'm sure the US would have done that. There's no logical reason to freely give Russia ammunition for diplomatic tension. If Bout had been successfully captured in UK, Australia or Europe, you can be sure the extradition hearing would have occurred and been legal.

Please provide a list of laws that were broken with the Thai extradition of Bout to the US.

Your last sentence is redundant since Bout was NOT arrested in either of the three legal domains you have listed. The laws there have no bearing on this topic.

Why don't YOU provide proof that there weren't a series of laws broken?! What kind of inane request is that?! Also, the article clearly uses the words "extradited" and "illegally" (which, for most, would be enough evidence to suggest that laws WERE broken) so, as far as this topic is concerned, I'm discussing what was said in the article. If you have a problem, then it's with the article, not with what I said. Also, the word "redundant" actually means unnecessarily repetitive (which I clearly wasn't); what you meant to say is that, because Bout wasn't arrested in the US, Australia or the UK, I was mistaken (in my thinking, and not "redundant") to assert that in some other specific jurisdictions, the result of this might have been different. I know where Bout was arrested but thanks for the update!

I don't need to provide proof of your statement. This is a discussion forum and the general practice lies with the person making claims to be able to back them up.

And I think the use of "redundant" is appropriate. After all you, admittedly, did repeat an assertion made by RUSSIAN government controlled television that a RUSSIAN arms dealer had been arrested illegally.

Don't you ever question the sources of your information?

First, I made no reference to any specific laws, so to suddenly request documentation of some supposed set of laws is ridiculous. I was talking about the nature of things in Thailand that might cause the Russian side (to accurately or inaccurately, it doesn't matter) claim the extradition was illegal. I claim no great knowledge of every factual detail in this case. I'll leave that to more well-versed posters such as yourself.

Second, you said my last sentence was redundant. The last sentence from MY post was certainly NOT sourced from "The Voice of Russa". Read it again if you doubt that. I went along with the article, assuming for argument's sake, that the Russian source was correct. If the extradition was legal by Thai (or even American) standards then wonderful. That doesn't negate my point at all. I only posted because other posters couldn't seem to imagine why things in might be done a little, shall we say, "extra-legally" in Thailand.

Edited April 6, 2012 by Unkomoncents

[Unkomoncents]

Actually there is double hypocrisy here:

1) The US happily supplied arms to the mujahadeen in Afghanistan during the USSR invasion - a fact that has come back to haunt them ever since;

2) Why wasn't Oliver North - America's most famous arms peddlar - prosecuted for supplying arms to Iran? I suppose the fact that he did it on behalf of the US regime at the time meant he was untouchable.

Because Victor Bout wasn't American, nor did he work for the US government in any capacity. The American government works for itself and the American people first. The US is not, nor was it meant to be, some purveyor of objective justice for all people in the world. It's incredibly ironic that people accuse the US of wrongly involving itself in everyone elses' affairs and then expect America to duly prosecute Americans (on behalf of Iran, in this case) who caused injustices in other countries. Either the US is responsible for the wellbeing of the world, or it's not (if not, then it's implied that the US acts for its interests regardless of those of other countries). It can hardly be both ways. And, for the record, this is not an endorsement of the US in ANY capacity. In any event, as some others have noted, Viktor Bout was no saint. The man belongs in a cell, and if America was the only country that had the wherewithall to do it, so be it.

Actually he DID work for the US. The US often claims it is working for the wellbeing of the world when it is really working for its own interests. This is a part of the hypocrisy. Supplying arms to Iran is not an Iranian problem - it was illegal in US law just the same as supposedly supplying arms to the FARC or any other group.

I am not a fan of Mr Bout but he was summarily handed over to the US by the Thai government when it looked like the Thai legal system was likely to acquit him (a second time). I also don't believe he got a fair trial in the US as well as being treated abysmally in custody.

It's pretty clear though that he mostly worked for himself and possibly Russia as a distant second. Also, for someone who is concerned so much with the legality vs. illegality of the actions of the United States, you seem curiously uninterested in the nature of Viktor Bout's actions. Again, the United States government acts (presumably) at the behest of over 300,000 Americans and involves over ten million government employees. There is no comparison between Viktor Bout (he is one man) and the United States government. Bout has been known to have been involved in illegal activities by intelligence agencies all over the world for more than a decade. It takes only topical research to see that. Are you suggesting that he should have had a more fair trial to the extent that he should have been punished less? What do you suppose would have happened in the UK, if he'd finally been apprehended (after many, many years of international effort and cooperation)? Should he be freed? Do you believe, as the Russians have claimed, that he's innocent and that this is completely "political"?

[OzMick]

"Bout’s lawyer Albert Y. Dayan ........added that the issue of Bout’s extradition to Russia is also a possibility."

He also faces charges in Russia?

[Sing_Sling]

I'd echo some of the posters' opinion here about Bout's extradition and sentencing . . . good. It is completely irrelevant what the US, France, SA, Israel, Russia, China etc ad infintum do as well.

Focus on this case and ask yourselves if he belongs in jail for arms trafficking?

[personchester]

"Bout’s lawyer Albert Y. Dayan ........added that the issue of Bout’s extradition to Russia is also a possibility."

He also faces charges in Russia?

Russia considers Bout as innocent, if (as stated by Bout's lawyer) the US might consider his eventual extradition to Russia, then it would no doubt be based on an extradition exchange, that is to say the US wants the return of an american victim imprisoned in Russia.

That event would be a similar to the past extradition exchanges between the two countries in order to liberate their convicted spies. Bout is no doubt hoping for this, because in Russia he would be a free man again, and so would be the american chap in the exchange return to the US.

[OzMick]

"Bout’s lawyer Albert Y. Dayan ........added that the issue of Bout’s extradition to Russia is also a possibility."

He also faces charges in Russia?

Russia considers Bout as innocent, if (as stated by Bout's lawyer) the US might consider his eventual extradition to Russia, then it would no doubt be based on an extradition exchange, that is to say the US wants the return of an american victim imprisoned in Russia.

That event would be a similar to the past extradition exchanges between the two countries in order to liberate their convicted spies. Bout is no doubt hoping for this, because in Russia he would be a free man again, and so would be the american chap in the exchange return to the US.

The act you describe would more accurately be called a prisoner exchange. Quite likely you are correct, and just a case of another American perverting the English language.

[BigJohnnyBKK]

As an American I hold no illusions about the US government's saintliness; it sees its #1 job as protecting the interests of the business interests of its 1% - actually .01% is more accurate. And this is true for any country that I can think of. When helping to further its more abstract ideals like "human rights" isn't counter to those interests and not too difficult or expensive, it does so, perhaps only a secondary role, but that is what makes it very unusual among powerful nations historically.

The fact that a lot of its actions motivated by "job 1" are done under cover of the latter is indeed hypocritical, but at least it doesn't focus only on that mission. Much of humanity's progress in the world is in fact due to Amerika's off-and-on truly good works, just as much of the damage is done by the results of it doing its #1 main job.

I'm actually surprised they didn't just have him taken out while he was here, would have been quicker, easier and a lot cheaper, and I don't think too many people outside of Russia would have been bothered.

[NomadJoe]

As an American I hold no illusions about the US government's saintliness; it sees its #1 job as protecting the interests of the business interests of its 1% - actually .01% is more accurate. And this is true for any country that I can think of. When helping to further its more abstract ideals like "human rights" isn't counter to those interests and not too difficult or expensive, it does so, perhaps only a secondary role, but that is what makes it very unusual among powerful nations historically.

The fact that a lot of its actions motivated by "job 1" are done under cover of the latter is indeed hypocritical, but at least it doesn't focus only on that mission. Much of humanity's progress in the world is in fact due to Amerika's off-and-on truly good works, just as much of the damage is done by the results of it doing its #1 main job.

I'm actually surprised they didn't just have him taken out while he was here, would have been quicker, easier and a lot cheaper, and I don't think too many people outside of Russia would have been bothered.

Well said.

[TAWP]

Only 25 years after all the people who have been murdered with illegal weapons that he sold?

It can never be illegal to do an act that others are allowed to do - it is a parody of a justice system.

[TAWP]

Worth noting is that the judge gave him the absolute minimum in terms of jail time - indicating that the judge agreed that there was concerns with the prosecutions allegations.

[Naam]

i bet he'll be out and back in Russia within less than two years with nothing else on his mind than selling "illegal" weapons -meant and designed mainly to kill innocent US-citizens- to Colombia's FARC. what other choice has FARC to reduce those tens of thousands of Americans swarming around in their territory hampering their rebel activities?

[F4UCorsair]

I like the way the Americans do business, but 25 years?? Should have been 125!!"

[personchester]

"Bout’s lawyer Albert Y. Dayan ........added that the issue of Bout’s extradition to Russia is also a possibility."

He also faces charges in Russia?

Russia considers Bout as innocent, if (as stated by Bout's lawyer) the US might consider his eventual extradition to Russia, then it would no doubt be based on an extradition exchange, that is to say the US wants the return of an american victim imprisoned in Russia.

That event would be a similar to the past extradition exchanges between the two countries in order to liberate their convicted spies. Bout is no doubt hoping for this, because in Russia he would be a free man again, and so would be the american chap in the exchange return to the US.

The act you describe would more accurately be called a prisoner exchange. Quite likely you are correct, and just a case of another American perverting the English language.

The term "prisoner exchange" as you pointed out in your reply for the eventual happening in this case, is the expression of working class people.

The term "extradition" is the official & formal wording to extradite an alleged criminal from one country to another, the term "extraction exchange" refers to the interchange of victims, that is to say mutual liberation of victims back to their home country, in this case ... US & Russia.

Edited April 7, 2012 by personchester

[F4UCorsair]

You sure about those terms? Extraction exchange?? I couldn't find it in a google search, but I could find 'prisoner exchange', and 'extradition'. As for 'extraction', isn't that what's done to teeth??

[geriatrickid]

Only 25 years after all the people who have been murdered with illegal weapons that he sold?

It can never be illegal to do an act that others are allowed to do - it is a parody of a justice system.

Really? In some jurisdictions it appears to be the norm to be able to have sexual relations with children. Try that in Poland or Belgium or Fiji and you go to jail.

[edko]

Only 25 years after all the people who have been murdered with illegal weapons that he sold?

Are you kidding me??? This guy has sold weapons for the U.S where the U.S couldn't be seen selling weapons to certain countries. He's been in business with them all along, and now they crucify him for whatever reason! Besides how many people are killed by American soldiers on a daily basis all over the world in the name of OIL!!! The American government has killed more people than any other nation on this planet!!!

No, I think Germany, Russia, China are ahead by millions.

You're certainly correct there. I can't tell you the numbers for Adolph Hitler, but I believe over 7 million. Joseph Stalin is credited with over 25 million and Mao Tse Tung with 30 to 60 million. Pol Pot in Cambodia well over 1 million. I doubt seriously that the number of people killed directly by US forces after WWII even reaches 1 million.

If it were not for the United States, people in France would be speaking German, Great Britain would be a colony of Germany, and Australia, New Zealand and India would be colonies of Japan.

[flying]

I doubt seriously that the number of people killed directly by US forces after WWII even reaches 1 million.

Your joking right?

If not try to realize just since 9/11 recent studies claim 258,000 are dead

which includes 137,000 civilians in Iraq & Afghanistan

Pakistan ....hard to say as they do not release total number of dead nor costs to kill them but they say 35,000 is conservative

Then go look at some Vietnam numbers that alone will blow past your 1 million

[btunes]

The US beautifully extradited his ass outta BBK and quickly sentenced him up so he wouldn't spill the beans on the US and other international players.

[Sing_Sling]

France would be speaking German, Great Britain would be a colony of Germany, and Australia, New Zealand and India would be colonies of Japan.

And that would be a bad thing? (well, aside from it being the usual nonsensical hyperbole)

[F4UCorsair]

France would be speaking German, Great Britain would be a colony of Germany, and Australia, New Zealand and India would be colonies of Japan.

And that would be a bad thing? (well, aside from it being the usual nonsensical hyperbole)

Call it 'nonsensical hyperbole' if you wish, but Australia would be a colony of Japan if Japan hadn't made the mistake of attacking the fleet at Pearl Harbour and bringing the US into the war. That would be along with most South East Asian countries and India.

I've worked for the Japanese, in Japan, and I wouldn't enjoy having them as my masters in my own country.......which would be their country if history hadn't played out as it did.

[Sing_Sling]

France would be speaking German, Great Britain would be a colony of Germany, and Australia, New Zealand and India would be colonies of Japan.

And that would be a bad thing? (well, aside from it being the usual nonsensical hyperbole)

Call it 'nonsensical hyperbole' if you wish, but Australia would be a colony of Japan if Japan hadn't made the mistake of attacking the fleet at Pearl Harbour and bringing the US into the war. That would be along with most South East Asian countries and India.

I've worked for the Japanese, in Japan, and I wouldn't enjoy having them as my masters in my own country.......which would be their country if history hadn't played out as it did.

You are leaving out so many variables and that makes it a tired American WWII slogan.

Australia can be successfully invaded by Singapore . . . conquering and holding the place is a completely different thing all-together.

India has a billion people, add Pakistan and Bangla Desh and you have close to two billion . . . no way in the modern world could anyone rule that as a colony.

New Zealand? Sure, go ahead, though my wife would have chucked them out herself

France speaking German - as a second language it already did. GB a colony? Hardly.

You completely negate the reason why Japan attacked the US . . .

You completely negate the problems J and G were having with their supply line

You completely negate social development in the Germany and Japan

You completely negate the population of G and J and the absolute inability to hold such vast territories and populations

(And don't make the mistake of comparing the 19th century and earlier to the 20th and 21st as that would be even less credible)

Really, this thinking belongs in John Wayne movies

I've worked for Japanese as their Sales VP International out of Singapore and they were the best people I have ever worked with/for. Simply fantastic. Perhaps it is the attitude one brings to the table