Sweden Becomes Major Defense Supplier To US
Deep Kimchi
14-06-2006, 18:39
http://www.examiner.com/a-149545~Saab_Wins__1_8_Billion_Deal_With_U_S__Army.html
Ok, it's camouflage nets, etc. - but it's 1.8 billion dollars worth - which is quite a bit of camouflage netting.
Fass, I hope they're sending the good stuff...
Kulikovo
14-06-2006, 18:40
Why can't they send hot Swedish women instead?
Deep Kimchi
14-06-2006, 18:41
Why can't they send hot Swedish women instead?
That's a good point. I mean, if Fass isn't using them...
Tap the screen
14-06-2006, 18:42
they have, you just cant see them, their camo gear is that good
Kulikovo
14-06-2006, 18:43
Hot Swedish women have the power to end wars! Give Osama a sexy Swede and he'll end his jihad in a heart beat.
Refused Party Program
14-06-2006, 18:43
Why can't they send hot Swedish women instead?
Because women aren't toys? Besides, think of the postage costs.
I wonder just how much camoflage netting you can get for $1.8 billion? Cos I have this field with some....eh....crops that I.......uh.....need to camoflage.
>.>
<.<
Dododecapod
14-06-2006, 18:45
Ah. For a moment I though Sweden had changed their policies (they basically don't sell their military equipment. Which really pissed off some people when the Drakken and the Viggen turned out to be rather godlike warplanes...)
Kulikovo
14-06-2006, 18:45
$1.8 billion for camo netting? Something ain't right here.
Give Osama a sexy Swede and he'll end his jihad in a heart beat.
I'm right on it!
http://www.ukagriculture.com/four_seasons/images/swede.jpg
Give Osama a sexy Swede and he'll end his jihad in a heart beat.
That is no way to talk about Fass.
He isnt just some sort of sordid Jihad killing sex toy.
$1.8 billion for camo netting? Something ain't right here.
Could be an awful lot of it.
Kecibukia
14-06-2006, 18:51
$1.8 billion for camo netting? Something ain't right here.
Camo netting is just part of the deal ($20M). It's an entire system. What exactly that entails, I don't know yet.
Kulikovo
14-06-2006, 18:52
Could be an awful lot of it.
There's no way that camo netting for the US military could cost that much? Granted, it would be alot but over a billion dollars?! We're getting shafted by the Swedes here.
http://www.examiner.com/a-149545~Saab_Wins__1_8_Billion_Deal_With_U_S__Army.html
Ok, it's camouflage nets, etc. - but it's 1.8 billion dollars worth - which is quite a bit of camouflage netting.
Fass, I hope they're sending the good stuff...
Are they planning to hide America?
Iztatepopotla
14-06-2006, 18:53
It's snow camouflage, to use in Iraq.
Franberry
14-06-2006, 18:55
$1.8 billion for camo netting? Something ain't right here.
I bet they have lasers
Cluichstan
14-06-2006, 18:55
$1.8 billion for camo netting? Something ain't right here.
It's not just for visual camouflage. It also cuts down on a vehicle's infrared signature. And we've been buying it from that particular company for a few years now. This is nothing new.
Kulikovo
14-06-2006, 18:56
I bet they have lasers
Possibly...
GreatBritain
14-06-2006, 18:56
Not a good move... if the US army has a hard enough time distinguising friend from foe NOW... think what it'll be like with new camouflage :s
The Aeson
14-06-2006, 18:57
Actually, all of this is being saved up. And yes, they are going to hide America. We're just hoping the terrorists will forget about us, like they forgot we were monitoring their calls.
Cluichstan
14-06-2006, 18:57
Not a good move... if the US army has a hard enough time distinguising friend from foe NOW... think what it'll be like with new camouflage :s
Please come back when have a clue what you're talking about.
Daistallia 2104
14-06-2006, 19:15
Ah. For a moment I though Sweden had changed their policies (they basically don't sell their military equipment. Which really pissed off some people when the Drakken and the Viggen turned out to be rather godlike warplanes...)
Excuse me? , SAAB (http://www.saabgroup.com/en/index.htm) isn't the only Swedish arms manufacturing company. Bofors (http://www.boforsdefence.com/eng/home.asp) anybody?
And hell yes, they better be sending the good stuff. The Swedes make and sell (yes, Dododecapod, sell) excellent arms and military gear.
Please come back when have a clue what you're talking about.
He clue no got.
Deep Kimchi
14-06-2006, 19:47
Let's not forget the Carl Gustav, which is also used by US forces...
http://www.defense-update.com/products/c/carlgustav.htm
Cluichstan
14-06-2006, 19:50
Excuse me? , SAAB (http://www.saabgroup.com/en/index.htm) isn't the only Swedish arms manufacturing company. Bofors (http://www.boforsdefence.com/eng/home.asp) anybody?
Don't forget Kockums (http://www.kockums.se), too. ;)
Excuse me? , SAAB (http://www.saabgroup.com/en/index.htm) isn't the only Swedish arms manufacturing company. Bofors (http://www.boforsdefence.com/eng/home.asp) anybody?
And hell yes, they better be sending the good stuff. The Swedes make and sell (yes, Dododecapod, sell) excellent arms and military gear.
Gawd I hope if ABB made any of it that no spares are ever needed. Asea Brown Boveri blows goats at after purchase spare parts supply.
Carnivorous Lickers
14-06-2006, 20:20
I hope this equipment is part of the package:
http://www.swedishbikiniteam.com/exile.html
Mandatory Altruism
14-06-2006, 20:29
Don't expect to see this grow into much more except in cases where Swedish tech is MONSTROUSLY better than American (and in this day and age, few industrial nations have that pronounced an edge over their peers in any way. I hear Swedish stealth tech is pretty good though, for light naval vessels, anyway....any comments to educate me here ?)
Why ?
Because the Americans hate buying military systems that aren't made by American companies. What's the point of pork barrel contracts if the profits are going home to another country ? Sure, you get some taxes. But you don't have a voting district of people with lots of money in their pocket buying more cars and building more houses who know who's buttering their bread.
I mean, the American Navy is buying nuclear powered hunter-killer submarines of "the next generation"! wtf ? China has NOTHING meriting such a tool, and no one else is even potentially going to be mixing it up with the US (Russia's navy is a bloody junkyard after 15 years of minimal funding and training)
British persons
14-06-2006, 21:02
Are they planning to hide America?
that would be a nice change....
Yootopia
14-06-2006, 21:15
Are they planning to hide America?
I can see it now on the Atlases of the world.
"Mexico is the largest state in the world, after annexing someone or another..."
Texoma Land
14-06-2006, 21:29
It's snow camouflage, to use in Iraq.
:D *lol* I wouldn't be a bit surprised.
Todays Lucky Number
14-06-2006, 21:29
if Us is buying military equipment from someone that means they are sweeting some other secret deal. Like looking the other way when US incades antoher country.
Ultraextreme Sanity
14-06-2006, 22:09
Why can't they send hot Swedish women instead?
we need a hell of a lot more than a couple billion bucks for that !
But hell yeah !
I can see it now on the Atlases of the world.
"Mexico is the largest state in the world, after annexing someone or another..."
Ssssh... Do you want the nazi terrorists to find them? Please cover that page with swedish camouflage net.
I bet they have lasers
Mounted on sharks.
I want freaking sharks, with freaking lasers, now!!!
Because women aren't toys? Besides, think of the postage costs.
I bet for 1.8 billion dollars you can convince quite a few hot Swedish ladies to come on over of their own volition.
Daistallia 2104
15-06-2006, 05:04
Deep Kimchi Let's not forget the Carl Gustav, which is also used by US forces...
http://www.defense-update.com/products/c/carlgustav.htm
Produced by... Bofors! ;)
Don't expect to see this grow into much more except in cases where Swedish tech is MONSTROUSLY better than American (and in this day and age, few industrial nations have that pronounced an edge over their peers in any way. I hear Swedish stealth tech is pretty good though, for light naval vessels, anyway....any comments to educate me here ?)
Quite a few US weapons systems come from abroad, although many are produced under license or derived from foreign systems. Ones that come to mind:
M-3 Carl Gustav (Swedish)
LAV (Swiss MOWAG Piranha variant)
Stryker (Swiss MOWAG Piranha derivative)
M-240 GPMG (Belgian FN MAG)
Bofors L 60/70 40 mm gun (again Swedish - used in various roles - NATO standard AA gun, US naval AA gun, AC-130)
In addition, to these several components of the M1 Abrams are also foreign:
the original main gun is British, the current main gun is German, the remote turret for the .50 on the urban warfare kit is Norwegian, and the armour is dervived from British Chobham.
I'm sure others can suggest more foreign made, licensed, or derived US weapons systems.
Neu Leonstein
15-06-2006, 05:21
Yay! Strv 122 FTW!
I mean, the American Navy is buying nuclear powered hunter-killer submarines of "the next generation"! wtf ? China has NOTHING meriting such a tool, and no one else is even potentially going to be mixing it up with the US (Russia's navy is a bloody junkyard after 15 years of minimal funding and training)
They're probably scared of these things (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/935.htm), firing these things (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/3m14.htm). Silly Yankees.
Alas, some remnants of the Cold War persist, such as the arms industry. Hopefully Svenska Freds (http://www.answers.com/topic/swedish-peace-and-arbitration-society) will investigate this to see if it is compatible with Swedish law, seeing as dealing arms to countries at war is supposed to be illegal.
Deep Kimchi
15-06-2006, 12:52
Alas, some remnants of the Cold War persist, such as the arms industry. Hopefully Svenska Freds (http://www.answers.com/topic/swedish-peace-and-arbitration-society) will investigate this to see if it is compatible with Swedish law, seeing as dealing arms to countries at war is supposed to be illegal.
1.8 billion dollars covers a lot of incompatibilities.
1.8 billion dollars covers a lot of incompatibilities.
If anyone is to "expose illegal and dubious Swedish arms export deals," it's Svenska Freds. If they can't stop it, it's not illegal.
I'm sure others can suggest more foreign made, licensed, or derived US weapons systems.
You forgot the (AGM-119) Penguin missile used by the US Navy, which is made by Kongsberg Defence and Aerospace (Norwegian).
BogMarsh
15-06-2006, 13:13
Why can't they send hot Swedish women instead?
Oh. They would be 18 Billion a pop...
Daistallia 2104
15-06-2006, 15:56
You forgot the (AGM-119) Penguin missile used by the US Navy, which is made by Kongsberg Defence and Aerospace (Norwegian).
Good, good. And that reminds me of Raufoss - I know they make some ammunition for the US.
And I forgot the AV-8 Harrier. Also IMI, H&K and Beretta, makers of small arms for the US (Uzi - not used by DoD, IIRC, but by several federal agencies, MP-5, and M-9 pistol).
Anybody else?
Alas, some remnants of the Cold War persist, such as the arms industry. Hopefully Svenska Freds will investigate this to see if it is compatible with Swedish law, seeing as dealing arms to countries at war is supposed to be illegal.
May be illegal, but that hasn't stopped Sweden before. I know that Bofors sold their 37 mm AT and 40 mm AA guns to both Allied and Axis states during WWII. (I may be wrong on the exact dates of sales to some countries, and in some cases the were licesnsed.)
Mandatory Altruism
15-06-2006, 16:04
Still, the overwhelming amount of US materiel and weapons are purely domestic, and it seems thus that the "Not Built Here" syndrome in procurment is alive and well, if not holding the death grip it used to in the 70's ?
I am worried about what this says about the US. They're making a weapon system (the new hunter killers) that is designed _specifically_ to kill _retaliatory strike capability_ (new Russian ballistic missile subs).
I really hope they aren't planning trying to do a successful "stealth first strike" on the Chinese and Russian nuclear forces. Because if they fail, the world ends, and if they succeed, they essentially rule the world. I suppose the latter option is preferable....but it's still not something I'd like to see.
It just doesn't make sense....
Deep Kimchi
15-06-2006, 16:05
Still, the overwhelming amount of US materiel and weapons are purely domestic, and it seems thus that the "Not Built Here" syndrome in procurment is alive and well, if not holding the death grip it used to in the 70's ?
I am worried about what this says about the US. They're making a weapon system (the new hunter killers) that is designed _specifically_ to kill _retaliatory strike capability_ (new Russian ballistic missile subs).
I really hope they aren't planning trying to do a successful "stealth first strike" on the Chinese and Russian nuclear forces. Because if they fail, the world ends, and if they succeed, they essentially rule the world. I suppose the latter option is preferable....but it's still not something I'd like to see.
It just doesn't make sense....
The current B-2 Stealth is capable of striking targets with conventional weapons - and there isn't any real defense against it. But just because it's possible doesn't mean the US will run out right now and do it.
May be illegal, but that hasn't stopped Sweden before. I know that Bofors sold their 37 mm AT and 40 mm AA guns to both Allied and Axis states during WWII. (I may be wrong on the exact dates of sales to some countries, and in some cases the were licesnsed.)
Events from over half a century ago are quite irrelevant to what the law says today, and several arms deals have been foiled in recent history due to the law (for instance, exports to Yugoslavia were stopped, and Israel is still persona non grata). ISP, the agency in charge of overseeing individual arms export deals, has been reported to the Chancellor of Justice by Svenska Freds for allowing the export of weapons to the US and the UK while they were engaged in the Iraq war - that situation has not changed, they are still at war. I guess we can only hope that the law prevails, despite the government being, as they say, "willing to compromise" when it comes to such "strategic" allies as the UK and the US.
Well, at least I know what I'll be writing to my MP about, and what I'll be reporting myself to the Chancellor this summer.
Daistallia 2104
15-06-2006, 16:23
Events from over half a century ago are quite irrelevant to what the law says today, and several arms deals have been foiled in recent history due to the law (for instance, exports to Yugoslavia were stopped, and Israel is still persona non grata). ISP, the agency in charge of overseeing individual arms export deals, has been reported to the Chancellor of Justice by Svenska Freds for allowing the export of weapons to the US and the UK while they were engaged in the Iraq war - that situation has not changed, they are still at war. I guess we can only hope that the law prevails, despite the government being, as they say, "willing to compromise" when it comes to such "strategic" allies as the UK and the US.
Well, at least I know what I'll be writing to my MP about, and what I'll be reporting myself to the Chancellor this summer.
Fair enough. I suspected this was a new law/regulation. Just out of curiosity, do you know when the laws date to? (I know the US was using Bofors guns during the Vietnam War, but I don't know if they were actually sold to the US during wartime.)
Deep Kimchi
15-06-2006, 16:26
Fair enough. I suspected this was a new law/regulation. Just out of curiosity, do you know when the laws date to? (I know the US was using Bofors guns during the Vietnam War, but I don't know if they were actually sold to the US during wartime.)
The M-3 Carl Gustav is in the current US inventory, and IIRC, it has been there for some time (with Rangers and Special Forces in particular).
I would imagine that someone is buying the ammunition, because we're shooting them.
FFV also supplies the AT-4 anti-tank rocket to the US Army. They are used a great deal, so they need to be constantly replaced as well.
Daistallia 2104
15-06-2006, 16:43
The M-3 Carl Gustav is in the current US inventory, and IIRC, it has been there for some time (with Rangers and Special Forces in particular).
I would imagine that someone is buying the ammunition, because we're shooting them.
FFV also supplies the AT-4 anti-tank rocket to the US Army. They are used a great deal, so they need to be constantly replaced as well.
Doh. Brain fart. Of course.
Dododecapod
15-06-2006, 17:29
Interesting. I had been under the impression that Bofors was Danish.
But I also know that SAAB wasn't allowed to sell the Drakken to the Brits for evaluation. Perhaps they just aren't permitted to sell warplanes.
Cluichstan
15-06-2006, 17:30
Perhaps they just aren't permitted to sell warplanes.
No, they're selling Gripens to Hungary, the Czech Republic, and South Africa.
Neu Leonstein
16-06-2006, 02:58
Anybody else?
FN SCAR and the Roland AA-Missile.
Ultraextreme Sanity
16-06-2006, 03:09
I'm all for swedish stelth blondes . send them over to bomb me .
Daistallia 2104
16-06-2006, 05:10
FN SCAR and the Roland AA-Missile.
Oh, yes. And that reminds me that both possible replacements for the M-16/M-4 family (the XM-29 and XM-8) were HK designs. Of course one's on hold and the other's cancelled.
There's more I'm forgetting, I'm sure, but I'd say the "US only procurement" argument's been fairly well destroyed....