My point, from the beginning, is that US arms can be sold. They are not worthless, and giving them away means taxpayers funded jobs that give no benefit to the American people and line the pockets of for-profit business owners.
weapons produced by Americans paid for by Americans.
only now it’s not American soldiers who do the shooting.
You’re trying to argue that it’s a win for the US because Americans aren’t using it. If the US sold its equipment instead of giving it away, you would have a point that it is good for the American economy.
My counterpoint, from the beginning, was that giving away equipment “just means a defense contractor got richer at the expense of American taxpayers.”
The taxpayer money that was spent on equipment we gave away could’ve been better spent on something that actually benefits the American people. It would still create jobs, but those jobs would be benefiting us instead of defense contractors and whoever we give our equipment too.
My point, from the beginning, is that US arms can be sold. They are not worthless, and giving them away means taxpayers funded jobs that give no benefit to the American people and line the pockets of for-profit business owners.
You’re trying to argue that it’s a win for the US because Americans aren’t using it. If the US sold its equipment instead of giving it away, you would have a point that it is good for the American economy.
My counterpoint, from the beginning, was that giving away equipment “just means a defense contractor got richer at the expense of American taxpayers.”
The taxpayer money that was spent on equipment we gave away could’ve been better spent on something that actually benefits the American people. It would still create jobs, but those jobs would be benefiting us instead of defense contractors and whoever we give our equipment too.