> Why is arms supply vital to supporting democracy?
> Democracy is characterized by openness, armament ultimately results in closing.

The most single important function government serves is protection (there are some who argue this is the only function government *should* serve). This often requires the use of force, particularly when defending from an external threat.

I don't understand how "armament ultimately results in closing." Even my local city government is "armed" in the sense that their decisions are backed by an armed police force. No government can stand without having the threat of force at their disposal. Heck, the textbook Political Science 101 definition for government is something like "a legal monopoly of force."

In short, I guess my point is that it's foolish to assume that supporting countries via providing them arms is somehow wrong or harmful. I'd be interested to see this point elaborated on.

Stephen