Live data from Hacker News

World's Top Arms Exporters Visualized

insightfulinteraction.com

71–80 of 122 posts

Re: World's Top Arms Exporters Visualized

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAICT we don't disagree on any points. Regarding support for Yunukovych, the deal was signed and not followed up on. It's true his authority was fading fast - these things are not mutually exclusive. The Feb 21 deal was struck to resolve the standoff discussed in your linked NYT article - can you point to where it says that annexation began before Feb 21st (the earliest I can find it mention is March)? Similarly wit…

Cannot everything you are saying about The West[sic] be applied to what Russia has done/is doing in E.Ukraine as well as Dagestan/Ossetia?

What about Dagestan? Maybe you mean Abkhasia?

Re: World's Top Arms Exporters Visualized

#72
post #20

I notice there is no US-russia trade. Is this due to trade sanctions?

It may be a factor, but the US and Russia have very few imports overall. They don't need to, because they already produce almost everything they need at home. The graph is difficult to read, but it appears that most countries either have a significant arms industry (and mostly supply themselves and sell to others) or don't (and mostly buy from others). I don't see any countries that have significant amounts of both i…

China both imports and exports if I read correctly.

Re: World's Top Arms Exporters Visualized

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an Australian, I remember when guns were not something to be feared, but rather used if you need to .. my grandmothers 410 was used to dispatch snakes (dangerous) and rabbits (vermin) on a regular basis, and I remember fondly the bush trips with my uncles and cousins to eradicate invasive swine in the region. Fortunately, Australia is yet to be invaded (unless you count our own ancestors heinous actions against th…

Many nations in which guns are commonplace amongst the citizenry have been invaded, many times. The armies fought, the occupation happened, the vast majority of citizens did not pick up whatever weapon they had to hand to fight the invading army. The prevalence of weaponry amongst the citizenry of the countries involved has no bearing that I can see.

America lost the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan because of the prevalence of arms among the population ..

Re: World's Top Arms Exporters Visualized

#76

Hi my name is Natalia, and I'm the creator of this visualization. I want to thank the person who posted it here, and everyone for the discussion. I'd love to hear topics/ideas you are interested in for the future visualizations.

Thank you for the great visualizations! Here some ideas:

Personally, I would be interested in sensitivities instead of absolute values to capture trends. Say,

    * the rate of change of CO2 production per country
    * ...sensitivities of your given interactions
or

    * money invested in reforestation
    * change of healthcare expenses per country over time...
    * expenses for "bio" products vs. "discount"/fast food
Thanks again, and have fun! :-)

Re: World's Top Arms Exporters Visualized

#77
post #76

Hi my name is Natalia, and I'm the creator of this visualization. I want to thank the person who posted it here, and everyone for the discussion. I'd love to hear topics/ideas you are interested in for the future visualizations.

Thank you for the great visualizations! Here some ideas: Personally, I would be interested in sensitivities instead of absolute values to capture trends. Say, * the rate of change of CO2 production per country * ...sensitivities of your given interactions or * money invested in reforestation * change of healthcare expenses per country over time... * expenses for "bio" products vs. "discount"/fast food Thanks again, a…

WOW, thank you for this - brilliant ideas - and I personally love the topics which means a lot of inspiration while creating for me. Thanks again. Cheers, Natalia

Re: World's Top Arms Exporters Visualized

#78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many nations in which guns are commonplace amongst the citizenry have been invaded, many times. The armies fought, the occupation happened, the vast majority of citizens did not pick up whatever weapon they had to hand to fight the invading army. The prevalence of weaponry amongst the citizenry of the countries involved has no bearing that I can see.

Commonplace =/= prevalent. What wars are you thinkint of? No snark, just curious. In terms of prevalence, I don't think there is an apt comparison in the historical narrative for the US. I heard, but cannot confirm, that we blow off more rounds for target practice than the active conflicts around the globe use in combat. Even if that statement is incorrect, I can think of no other nation with an equivalent saturation…

Target practice plus bird hunting, which can use a lot of shotshells with little to show for it if you're not so good at it like me ^_^. I don't think most other forms of hunting use that very many rounds.

US civilian production is between 13-14 billion rounds per year (military production at Lake City, I don't know, but we get sold canceled orders and lots that fail milspec tests but are otherwise good ammo). Rimfire production alone is 3 billion. For some time a lot of that has been getting stored for ... a rainy day. And if you do the math that's only a bit more than 40 rounds/person/year.

But the number is still very very large. Heck, in one high school academic year on the JROTC rifle team I probably shot over 2,000 rounds of .22 LR (for every morning of practice, 3 sighting in shots plus 10 rounds each in two positions).

As for "saturation", yeah. In the last three years, the number of Missouri state issued concealed carry licenses (note any state's is good, and many are cheaper) in my county has almost doubled, to the point where 5% of the age eligible adults have one. And the 19-20 age range has only been eligible for about a year, while those getting them are largely the older, age and less ability to defend yourself + the Baby Boomers entering retirement age is a major driver.

42-3 states have "shall issue" concealed carry regimes, and California and Hawaii look to be following soon (it's being litigated, but some large population counties have already thrown in the towel); the Supremes could extend that to all states. In the last 4 years, Chicago went from nobody but the anointed being allowed to own handguns to shall issue concealed carry and more than a few incidents of legal self-defense with them.... Etc. etc.

Re: World's Top Arms Exporters Visualized

#80
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the February 21st deal to keep Yanukovych in power... was reneged It wasn't. The annexation of Crimea started before the deal was signed (Feb. 20) and Yanukovich decided to close shop and flee soon afterwards[1]. > and a world where US policy makers suggest covert arming of the Ukraine With Ukraine undergoing a not-so-covert invasion, and Russian leadership having already laid a claim to half of Ukraine, no less[2]…

AFAICT we don't disagree on any points. Regarding support for Yunukovych, the deal was signed and not followed up on. It's true his authority was fading fast - these things are not mutually exclusive. The Feb 21 deal was struck to resolve the standoff discussed in your linked NYT article - can you point to where it says that annexation began before Feb 21st (the earliest I can find it mention is March)? Similarly wit…

> the deal was signed and not followed up on.

Yanukovich left the country (illegally, BTW), before the deal could even be followed upon. There wasn't anything for the parliament to do, but appoint an acting president and call for new elections.

> can you point to where it says that annexation began before Feb 21st (the earliest I can find it mention is March)?

Not in the article, no. But there are plenty of sources showing that. The Girkin interviews[1] or the Crimean annexation medal[2], among others.

> I would have to admit that it was EU membership, not NATO, in this case.

This is a big difference. Finland and Austria are both EU countries, but they've never been NATO members. EU is a political and economic union, not a military one. Russia's claim that Ukraine becoming a EU member poses a military threat to them is dishonest at best.

> and training and funding groups in the Ukraine, and having controlled the election process in Kiev (calling afoul when Russia performed the same in the Crimea)

What groups? There wasn't any paramilitary training or funding, contrary to what Russia would like us to believe. The West may have supported some NGOs, but that was perfectly legal (and acceptable) way of trying to sway the public opinion, as opposed to capturing the Crimean parliament building with commandos and herding the MPs into it in the middle of the night to force them to vote for a farce referendum[3][1].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcCqrzctxH4

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medal_%22For_the_Return_of_Crim...

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUH-A3IF3h0

Post reply on HN