It's more like someone selling a case of bullets while knowing that the buyer will use it to kill someone. I can't say if it's legal or not, but it's certainly not very ethical.
This has got to be the most naive statement i've ever read on the internet.
First of all, it's not illegal to sell arms to your own government's military, and the whole point of the military buying them is to kill people with. (Sorry, "defend our freedom")
Second, products aren't manufactured just for fun. They're made so someone can buy them and use them. The market's demands are the reason the product exists. So if you don't like the product, you have to direct your attentions to the market for the product, not the manufacturers or salespeople. You can get mad at the salesmen all you want - they'll still just collect their big fat paycheck and the market will keep on killing people. Assuming it's the killing and maiming you don't like, I highly recommend you get angry at the USA and not Dow, since the USA is the reason Dow invented and sold chemicals to begin with.
You can call Dow unethical if you want - they don't give a shit. And it is completely meaningless in the context of wanting people to stop getting hurt.
This has got to be the most naive statement i've ever read on the internet.
If so then you are certainly on a different internet. His statement is very valid or logical. He never said DOW was responsible, but they were acted unethically. Someone could write a computer virus that would wipe out the US government dataset for $1B then proceed to say "I was paid for it, I should not go to jail because I did not click START." They would be right, but they would also rank high on the list of most unethical individuals.
