Thread: Victor Bout - Russian Businessman (?) facing 25 years in US prison

A Russian businessman was accused of assisting terrorists by selling them weapons out of Thailand. So the US promptly kidnapped him and prosecuted him in New York. Now he is apparently facing minimum of 25 years of prison in the USA.

The USA reckons Bout is guilty of "plotting to kill American citizens". Bout is saying he was trying to sell airplanes.

I don't know much more of this and I dislike the sale of weapons in general, about as much as I dislike the idea of kidnapping people and dragging them off to a foreign country to face trial.

What are peoples views on this? Does Victor Bout get what's coming to him, or is this a travesty of justice?

Originally Posted by Hanna

I don't know much more of this and I dislike the sale of weapons in general, about as much as I dislike the idea of kidnapping people and dragging them off to a foreign country to face trial.

That pretty much covers my opinion on the matter. It's not only about Bout. This case creates a very dangerous precedent. US made it clear that it can 'legally kidnap' people in other countries just because they think that person is dangerous. And the jury found him guilty, oh I can imagine how it was depicited in the 'totally unbiased' American media. If we accept the axiom that 95% of all the people in the world are idiots, that means that 11 out of 12 juriors were totally susceptible to anything the prosecutor would say. I wonder what would US do if some other country did that to an American...

Technically, what US did is an act of war.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Technically, what US did is an act of war.

+10
It's more than a dangerous precedent - arresting foreign citizens on foreign ground and prosecuting them under American law is becoming routine. Pretty much the same happened to Kim Schmitz (the founder of Megaupload and its associated websites). The only reason US is able to do it is because they bullied most of the world into obeying, I wish there were a way to oppose it.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

+10
It's more than a dangerous precedent - arresting foreign citizens on foreign ground and prosecuting them under American law is becoming routine. Pretty much the same happened to Kim Schmitz (the founder of Megaupload and its associated websites). The only reason US is able to do it is because they bullied most of the world into obeying, I wish there were a way to oppose it.

It's happened to several British people lately - and then I am not talking about the type of British citizens who take their holidays at Chez Bin Laden in Pakistan.... Whose Britishness could be questioned, although in my view their rights as citizens count too.

The cases that are beginning to cause a stir are to do with middle class, white people who simply did something that annoyed the USA, but does not even warrant prison in the UK.

This can be accommodated under a law that was intended for handling radical terrorists. Pretty convenient outcome of 9/11...

Remains to be seen what happens with Julian Assange, who is STILL awaiting the court order about extradition to Sweden which has caved in to US pressure before, about freedom of the press. The terrorist extradition law could be applied to him too.

Neither the UK nor Sweden would like to breach their own laws in connection with Assange, in order to please the USA. On the other hand, there is a lot at stage. Meanwhile Assange is still under house arrest in an allround ridiculous and pathetic miscarriage of justice.

A British retired man sold some battery parts that ended up in Iran, and for this he will to go to prison in Texas, where he might be put in a "chain gang" - a sort of medieval way of keeping prisoners working and chained together at the same time. A Retired British Business Man Being Extradited To The US Worries He Will Have To Join A Prison Gang - Business Insider

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

+10
It's more than a dangerous precedent - arresting foreign citizens on foreign ground and prosecuting them under American law is becoming routine. Pretty much the same happened to Kim Schmitz (the founder of Megaupload and its associated websites). The only reason US is able to do it is because they bullied most of the world into obeying, I wish there were a way to oppose it.

Well, go ahead and see you at a trial!

I ain't sure about the Megaupload guy, but those selling dangerous stuff to terrorists, including those like Iranian government, etc. should go to jail for a long term, no matter what country it is. They simply have to stop trading that stuff until it's too late.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

Well, go ahead and see you at a trial!

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm talking about. "Democracy" in action.

I ain't sure about the Megaupload guy, but those selling dangerous stuff to terrorists, including those like Iranian government, etc. should go to jail for a long term, no matter what country it is. They simply have to stop trading that stuff until it's too late.

Yes, they should go to jail. But there's no legal reason for them being prosecuted in the US and under American law. It's not universal, and there are still other countries around with their own laws, if you forgot. I could understand if this man would have been prosecuted in Russia or even in Thailand, since he operated on their territory, but Americans barging into the picture is too much.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm talking about. "Democracy" in action.

Yes, they should go to jail. But there's no legal reason for them being prosecuted in the US and under American law. It's not universal, and there are still other countries around with their own laws, if you forgot. I could understand if this man would have been prosecuted in Russia or even in Thailand, since he operated on their territory, but Americans barging into the picture is too much.

Well, as long as it doesn't concern U.S. national security, they could be dealt with somewhere else. Selling weapons to terrorists that are most likely going to use them to attack the U.S. is a completely different matter. I think it's just so obvious and clear, isn't it?

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm talking about. "Democracy" in action.

Yes, they should go to jail. But there's no legal reason for them being prosecuted in the US and under American law. It's not universal, and there are still other countries around with their own laws, if you forgot. I could understand if this man would have been prosecuted in Russia or even in Thailand, since he operated on their territory, but Americans barging into the picture is too much.

Exactly. My opinion is that Russia should have dealt with him, if it needed to be done. It's another question why Russia hasn't, and there could be many reasons I suppose.

But I don't think there is ANY rationale that the USA arrests a Russian citizen, in Thailand, for selling weapons to non-Americans (the FARC guerilla).The FARC guerilla were considered a liberation army not so long ago, similar to the ANC in South Africa, for example, and received foreign aid from many respectable countries. The quarrel there is an internal matter for Columbia to solve - that country is not some kind of paragon of virtue and there is a good reason why the FARC exists, it is their methods that are questionable.

I don't see what Columbia's affairs have to do with the USA either. The only "American citizens" that would be affected would be CIA advisors or elite soldiers who are there meddling in Columbia's affairs. (his supposed crime was "plotting to kill American citizens").

Wait until China arrests an American who meddling in their sphere of interest, brings him to Beijing and sentence him for terrorism, to serve 25 years in a Chinese prison (probably not that much worse than a chain gang in Texas)... Maybe that would make people reflect a bit on the illogical and creepy precedent set by this sentencing. But with people's skewed perspective of reality it would more likely lead to a big political drama and biased media reporting.

And like I said, something like this recently happened to a British man too, and a school boy who hacked a US defense system for fun.

Here is an interesting entry about Victor Bout from Wikipedia

Viktor Anatolyevich Bout (Russian: Виктор Анатольевич Бут) (born 13 January 1967, near Dushanbe, Tajik SSR, Soviet Union) is a convicted arms smuggler and political prisoner.^[1]

Having graduated from the Military Institute of Foreign Languages,^[22][27][28] he is said to be fluent in six languages.^[29] These include Persian and Esperanto, which he mastered already at the age of 12,^[30][31] and in the early 1980's he was member of the Esperanto club in Dushanbe.^[32] Bout's personal website states that he served in the Soviet Army as a translator, holding the rank of Lieutenant.^[6]

Language genius and Esperanto club member turns terrorist arms dealer... how sad. He'll be a broken man when he gets out of prison in the USA. Assuming he even survives. I guess it's another fallout of the events in the 90s, in the ex USSR. Under different circumstances he would probably have been a really nice and legitimately accomplished person.

His main crime seems to be that he ignored existing embargos and shipped equipment to whoever could pay. His main fortune was made from shipping and not from weapons sale.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

+10
It's more than a dangerous precedent - arresting foreign citizens on foreign ground and prosecuting them under American law is becoming routine. Pretty much the same happened to Kim Schmitz (the founder of Megaupload and its associated websites). The only reason US is able to do it is because they bullied most of the world into obeying, I wish there were a way to oppose it.

I agree with you gRomozeka. My opinion here is not because of what's right or wrong, but rather because of what country should be responsible for it. I understand the way it went down, "sting op" and all that. In my opinion that's all the more reason why Russia, as one of the world's biggest powers and sometimes in some ways the biggest (space flight comes to mind, just saying), should have been consulted before anything was decided upon properly.

I also get the feeling that this is not so much just America's doing, as "advised" by those forces in the UN who are chiding Russia for not being "part of the club." I think some people will disagree on this last part because it's a pretty out-there connection to make, but it helps me understand the motivations better - unless, and I doubt it, America's security entities were actually *afraid* of Bout's ability to provide weaponry (I doubt it because he's just one more marketeer in a packed bazaar), it seems to me to be the only motivation capable of galvanizing major action (any action against Russia by US is a major one, given our history) like this one.

I'm sure a lot of people are more morally-compuncted by this news than I am; I just think it's like this: The amount of people that died from Bout's weapons would PALE in comparison to the amount that would die if US and Russia conflicted, even in a small way. So it's the better of two evils to channel Paunchus in this case - "Looking the other way a little bit can save the world," as they say.

luck/life

Originally Posted by Ramil

That pretty much covers my opinion on the matter. It's not only about Bout. This case creates a very dangerous precedent. US made it clear that it can 'legally kidnap' people in other countries just because they think that person is dangerous. And the jury found him guilty, oh I can imagine how it was depicited in the 'totally unbiased' American media. If we accept the axiom that 95% of all the people in the world are idiots, that means that 11 out of 12 juriors were totally susceptible to anything the prosecutor would say. I wonder what would US do if some other country did that to an American...

Technically, what US did is an act of war.

Well... include me in that 95% and as for how he was depicted in the American media... I actually don't recall hearing about this entire thing until Hanna brought it up. I just Googled his name and interestingly enough, according to the New York Times, Bout's lawyers did not even present ONE witness.

Now the last case I remember where someone went up against the US Government in New York and rested without producing a single witness on their behalf, was Robert Altman and the BCCI case... he won, but in the media and I believe in the eyes of the world, he was guilty and it didn't matter that he won.

rockzmom, if you're arrested somewhere abroad, brought to US and got accused of the arms trade, what witnesses would you be able to present? Some Nicaraguan guerilla fighter who would say 'No, your honor, that person hasn't sold me any rockets"?

Originally Posted by Ramil

rockzmom, if you're arrested somewhere abroad, brought to US and got accused of the arms trade, what witnesses would you be able to present? Some Nicaraguan guerilla fighter who would say 'No, your honor, that person hasn't sold me any rockets"?

In a way yes... if he really was selling legitimate planes and/or parts to other customers all these years, he would have some sort of paper trail and other customers he bought and sold from/to or employees. Not one of them could have been a witness to back up his story that the US set him up with this particular transaction? If the US only had this ONE example of his selling arms "the merchant of death" as they dubbed him, and not say 10 or 20 examples over the "many years" that the DEA has been watching him and building their case against him and he had records dating back years of perfectly legal transactions, with witnesses and product or photos of products to prove it, it would have helped to make a jury see a case for entrapment or that the US really was just setting him up.

I'm not even speaking about this particular case, I'm speaking about the apparent fact that the jurisdiction of the American law has somehow spread over the entire globe. I find this fact disturbing.

Originally Posted by Ramil

I'm not even speaking about this particular case, I'm speaking about the apparent fact that the jurisdiction of the American law has somehow spread over the entire globe. I find this fact disturbing.

Why would it be disturbing you? What can you do that you could get away with in Russia, and couldn't in the U.S.?

Originally Posted by Eric C.

Why would it be disturbing you? What can you do that you could get away with in Russia, and couldn't in the U.S.?

The principle is important. If you're suggesting to us all to submit to the hehemony of the US around the world - fine then, go kiss Uncle Sam's ass. I think you're quite ready for that.

Originally Posted by Ramil

The principle is important. If you're suggesting to us all to submit to the hehemony of the US around the world - fine then, go kiss Uncle Sam's ass. I think you're quite ready for that.

That is awesome. Go on!

This thread ties back to the Cold War thread and how Americans believe in manifest destiny. We have it taught to us from an early age that we are right and everyone else is not so much wrong, but needs saving. It is hard for us to understand why you would not like to have the same type of things we have and live the way we do. Our way has to be so much better than yours. We just can't fathom the idea of anyone not wanting the same system that we have. The same freedoms that we have. To be able to worship freely, live wherever you want to, come and go as you please, go to whatever school you want to and study whatever you want to study, say pretty much whatever you want and not live in fear. Now that of course is an over simplification of things but for the most part it is true.

I remember the first time we went to El Salvador and the girls were old enough to comprehend and could not understand why the people had dirt floors, no beds, hardly any food and yet, the people were happy. This made no sense to them. The next time they went back, they just slipped right back into El Salvador mode and it wasn't as hard for them. They knew what to expect. The girls have the best memories of time spent in El Salvador because they had less rules and worries about everyday life there. It also gave them a better perspective about the world. It would be a shame if one day we went back and it had turned into just another town like any American town.

Our laws are not the same as other countries but that has not stopped us from trying save people and make the world a better place as "we" see it. We tried with SOPA and the world let it be known rather quickly that the US does not own the Internet. Apparently we are now trying to save the world by protecting it from people who are selling weapons or parts to other nations or people that we believe are up to no good. It is in our nature to do this. It is hard to change a culture that has been going on since the start. It is in our DNA so to speak.

I am not saying that what we are doing is right, just trying to possibly explain why it is we do it and why so many Americans might feel it is what we should be doing.

I guess the problem with this guy that he is most likely weapon smuggler in he can't be sued by Russian law because there is nothing criminal in he's actions when he is on the territory of Russia
"plotting to kill American citizens" - this is not a criminal charge by Russian law and US officials know that
What probably going to happen - some Americans guys will get "randomly" arrested in Russia, maybe not know maybe in a year and then an exchange will be made

Originally Posted by Doomer

What probably going to happen - some Americans guys will get "randomly" arrested in Russia, maybe not know maybe in a year and then an exchange will be made

Frankly, I wouldn't think it was such a pity if that happened. This has got to stop. The USA has to get the message - it is not ok to kidnap citizens of other countries for crimes comitted in other countries, and throw them in prison for 25 years for political reasons.

That is the sort of thing that even the most villified enemies of the USA, like Cuba, Iran and North Korea only stretch to on rare occassions. It is really apalling - the crime and the criminal had nothing to do with the USA.

The arrest would have been justified if Bout was American, or if he was carrying out his activities in the USA. Neither was the case.

Here is an equivalent scenario if it was played out with other countries:
Iran kidnaps an sales director of Bofors, a Swedish weapons maker. He is thrown in prison in Iran for 25 years. The motivation is given as "he was plotting to kill Iranian citizens". Bofors sells weapons to Saudi Arabia which has been propping up the inpopular regime in Bahrain. Iran on the other hand, supports the uprising in Bahrain and has agents there, similar to the American agents in Columbia. It's a like-for-like scenario. But I doubt even Iran would do a thing like that.

How much is Bout's nationality related to this? What would have happened if he had been an EU nationality, British in particular, Australian... or Chinese?

And arresting him will not change anything. Victor Bout was "recycling" old weapons, there is any number of corporations peddling brand new and much more efficient weapons then the ones he was using. On a scale of "evilness" I'd say any corporation that is in the weapons industry for profit is equally evil and does more harm than Victor Bout did.

While reading comments in this thread I changed my view on this. At first I did not care much, but everything taken into consideration, I now do. And btw, I liked Rockzmom's comment. I realise that most Americans don't reflect on this type of stuff at all, or they just make the assumption that she outlined, or they accept the version of events as presented in US media.

Originally Posted by Hanna

And arresting him will not change anything. Victor Bout was "recycling" old weapons, there is any number of corporations peddling brand new and much more efficient weapons then the ones he was using. On a scale of "evilness" I'd say any corporation that is in the weapons industry for profit is equally evil and does more harm than Victor Bout did.

There is a chance that he is a wrong guy in a wrong place
And maybe Russian officials just set him up to hide the truth