 |
|
Take Action!
Stop U.S. Weapons Exports
The United States is the world's leading arms dealer. The Pentagon argues that its $32 billion business is necessary to "promote regional stability," yet its 5 biggest customers are countries where conflict currently rages: Iraq, Pakistan, Israel, Afghanistan, and Colombia. Not only do we sell them, we give $4 billion/year to countries so they can afford them. Over the last 3 years, we agreed to buy $10 billion in equipment and weapons on behalf of Afghanistan. The U.S. does not even track these weapons and cannot account for many hundreds of thousands of them. We even provide arms to weak and failing states that we have
criticized for human rights violations, lack of democracy, torture, assassinations, and the support of terrorism-in pursuit of short term parochial nterests.
Every day, over 1000 people are killed with firearms, and many thousands more die indirectly as a result of armed violence or are forced off their land, driven from their homes, raped, tortured, or maimed. Sadly, the weapons we have sold have ultimately been turned against our own soldiers, as was the case after we armed the Taliban. Selling our arms to other nations and regimes is, over the long run, destabilizing at best, and suicidal at worst.
Yet, the U.S. was one of only two nations that voted "NO" to an Arms Trade Treaty at the U.N. last fall. The other nation was Zimbabwe.
After January 20, email President Obama at his email address, Vice President Biden at his email address, and Secretary of State Clinton at this website. Strongly urge that the U.S. rescind its policy of exporting weapons to countries involved in ongoing conflict and do not support democracy and civil and political rights for all citizens. The U.S. should show leadership and take a stand in favor of an Arms Trade Treaty. |
 |
 |
|
NEW! - Exclusive Podcast Interviews with:
People Who Make a Difference in Arms Control
 Robert J. O'Neill AO, Professor Emeritus of the History of War at Oxford University, tells Daisy Alliance why he changed his mind about the need for nuclear weapons as a deterrent and now believes that they must be completely eliminated. He describes what types of security arrangements might substitute for nuclear weapons and facilitate the goal of global disarmament. O'Neill discusses potential "rogue states," such as Iran and North Korea and the prospects for peace in the Middle East. He points out what lessons the U.S. could learn from history and offers some advice to President Elect Obama.
In his long and distinguished career, O'Neill was Chairman of the Council of the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS), Chairman of the Trustees for the Imperial War Museum in London, and a member of the Canberra Commission on the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons.
|
|
 |
|
Featured Article
The World's Most Dangerous Threat
In an article for The Huffington Post, Eric Margolis argues that the conflict between India and Pakistan over Kashmir is the most dangerous nuclear threat to the world. Since the Mumbai attacks, the threat of nuclear war between the two rivals has greatly increased, as both countries have their nuclear weapons on high alert status. Margolis provides a brief history of the conflict between India and Pakistan and argues that intervention must be a priority for the great powers. Read Article
Opinion
Let Them Eat Nukes
The United States spends approximately $40 billion annually to maintain its 5,000+ nuclear weapon stockpile, about $8,000,000/year just to maintain one weapon. That's a staggering amount of money, and it does not even include money spent on the research and development of new nuclear weapons, such as the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program. Do U.S. taxpayers really need to pay such an enormous sum for a Cold War relic-the threat of mutual assured destruction-since the U.S and Russia haven't been enemies for 18 years? In these difficult economic times, should the government reduce, or indeed eliminate, the nuclear weapons stockpiles and put the $40 billion to better use? What could we do with an extra $40 billion per year?
Read more in Daisy Alliance Blog |
|
|
|
 |
