United States refuses to sell missiles to Finland
Relations may not be so good between U.S. and Finland… [but you know who else may have good relations with the U.S. right now? ...the entire globe. So I wouldn't worry.]
The United States has refused to sell Finland precision cruise missiles for its Hornet fighters. The newspaper Helsingin Sanomat reports that the Pentagon denied the request for Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles, or JASSMs, which was part of a package of modernizing equipment that Finland is seeking from the US.
So far the US has only sold these missiles to Australia, one of its closest allies.
The newspaper says that arms deals are usually a good measure of bi-lateral relations, and that the United States’ refusal to sell the requested missiles is an indication that the relationship between Finland and the US is not as good as it could be.
Shame On You, Dr. Phil
Comment by finlandfreak — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 2:38 am
Selling them to Finland would be like selling them to the whole EU.
Finland’s request for JASSM’s totally negates their claim that their forces are solely defensive in nature as those missile are ‘attack’ weapons.
As for Australia, I hope we gave them a discount. That makes me wonder, where was Finland going to get the money to buy them. How much do they cost? $500,000+ each? How many did they want to buy, one?
The US probably thought they were joking;)
Comment by Fred Fry — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 2:44 am
Well, given the debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan—not to mention the next one in Iran—isn’t it possible that America needs to keep those missiles for itself, just in case?
And what if they suddenly discover weapons of mass destruction in Venezuela (the 5th largest oil exporter in the world)?
Comment by Kristian (in Espoo) — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 2:56 am
what you really want are JDAMS, big area killers. An entire Soviet army can be taken out with one JDAM.
Comment by winter — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 3:30 am
Oh wait, as Human Shields for Iran, what the heck do you need missiles for?
Comment by winter — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 3:32 am
human shields are not problem because human shields are our enemies!!!
human shilds are like shit!!!!
Comment by finlandfreak — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 3:38 am
we need jdams to kill humand shields,communists, our russian enemies and hippies.
Comment by finlandfreak — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 3:40 am
we need jdams to kill humand shields,communists, our russian enemies and hippies.
You forgot to mention those 100 ASEM punkers.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 3:43 am
Once Sauli is prime minister, well get them..
Comment by STP — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 6:39 am
“Finland’s request for JASSM’s totally negates their claim that their forces are solely defensive in nature as those missile are ‘attack’ weapons.”
Surely one does not have one kind of weapon for defence and another for attack. You need to blow stuff up whether you’re defending or attacking your country. Indeed, I’m not even sure I can think of a weapon that could be solely used for attack purposes.
Comment by finnsense — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 7:39 am
Yesterday I was trying to Google some info about JASSM’s and the Netherlands. I was able to find the decision of the parliament -to go ahead with the costly purchase, but after that no more information. So have they been sold to the Netherlands or not? Oh and Fred, Finland had the budget for buying the overpriced Hornets, so why not these toys. After all, the soldiers come cheap here…
Comment by majava — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 11:43 am
Well I guess Finland will go for the Taurus missile instead and by the way who the hell wants to buy american made weapons they only hit hospitals and schools (with terrorist inside of course)
Comment by Blah — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 11:56 am
#10: ‘Indeed, I’m not even sure I can think of a weapon that could be solely used for attack purposes.’
ICBM, anyone? I think it’s time Finland really rethink and asssess it’s attack capabilities. Åland people will never dream of joining Sweden if we got NUKES.
Comment by aet75 — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
“…totally negates their claim that their forces are solely defensive…”
Well, if you stick all the time to defence, the battle just remains undecisive. You must attack at least in the end to kick the enemy out. That’s how the traditional doctrine works here. Weaken the attacking enemy gradually by suitable defensive means, until he is weak enough and you can take his positions back by a counterattack. That’s how it worked in Tali-Ihantala.
Comment by Antti (the redneck one) — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 1:03 pm
If we can’t join NATO, Finland should apply for a membership of the axis of evil. Kim Jong Il could sell us some of his new shit.
Comment by Anonymous — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 1:47 pm
Finland needs to build some nukes !
Comment by unlce sam — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
“Surely one does not have one kind of weapon for defence and another for attack.”
Sorry, but these things travel over 2,000 miles. With these you can strike Moscow and beyond, from Helsinki, or even lapland.
Land Mines are purely a defensive weapon.
Hand grenades come in Defensive and attack variants. (One requires you to throw it from behind a protected position)
Hard to believe, there is a difference between offensive and defensive weapons. Of course there is lots of overlap as well.
A nuke is a defensive weapon as well, unless you have a delivery system to send it ‘downrange’.
Comment by Fred Fry — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
Now here is a video of a failed attack. You all just need some good Marines. I like the ending. This is what happens when you fu&* with the USA quote.
ARMY
Comment by winter — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 4:14 pm
“Sorry, but these things travel over 2,000 miles. With these you can strike Moscow and beyond, from Helsinki, or even lapland.”
Say what? The range of JASSM is “only” 320km. Even the extended range version doesn’t have a range of 2000 miles.
Comment by Anonymous — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 4:17 pm
“range of JASSM ” is then added to the range of the aircraft.
so 600 miles for aircraft plus 600 miles for JASSM, is the range.
Comment by winter — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
Ooops. My error.
Not withstanding my mistake, It is still an attack weapon.
A very expensive one at that.
Comment by Fred Fry — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
Hmmm…I guess gen. Lyytinen concludes that the old trick of sneaking into returning Soviet bomber formations over the Gulf of Finland, following them to their bases and dropping the bombs on planes on the ground after the last one has landed won’t cut the mustard anymore…Or the air-to-ground attacking capability has become fashionable. I think it was next to a naughty word, when I was in Tikkakoski.
Comment by Antti (the redneck one) — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 5:00 pm
#14 Antti, I think you mean “defense in depth”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_in_depth
Kind of a surprise they wouldn’t sell Finland the missiles. Maybe they were worried that someone would sell the technology to Russia.
Don’t know why Finland can’t have attack weapons even if the mission is defensive. Kind of like telling a football team to play only defense.
Comment by dhen — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
Well, according to your President, there is no problem that can’t be solved diplomatically. So why spend this much for a handful of missiles? Of course she is saying this from behind a stockpile of rapidly-deployable landmines. (And when I Finland going to sign the landmine ban like the rest of Europe?)
Comment by Fred Fry — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 7:02 pm
“Kind of a surprise they wouldn’t sell Finland the missiles. ”
Not really. You all set the tone.
Well if the EU could be trusted? Come on, if Iran sets of a Nuke in the EU, you all would want to strike back.
Can’t have that happen. So no new missiles.
Comment by winter — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 7:03 pm
Here is one reason why the US said no:
This did not help Finland’s chances either:
Then there is Finland not being a part of NATO. Not that NATO has any value any longer.
Comment by Fred Fry — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 7:51 pm
“I think you mean “defense in depth—
Yep, that’s the word.
“And when I Finland going to sign the landmine ban like the rest of Europe?”
It’s coming down the road. The landmine production has already been ended, so the signing date is set by the date of expiry of the last lot stored. I think it was sometime in the next decade.
It remains to be seen, whether the substituting system is some sort of artillery shell spreading bomblets all over the place in perfect compliance to the Ottawa treaty and nobody knowing exactly where they landed, but what the heck. Whole world is a damn 1st of May parade. It’s more important to make a good appearance, than solve any real problems.
Comment by Antti (the redneck one) — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 8:07 pm
“It’s more important to make a good appearance, than solve any real problems.”
nicely put, for the Finnish “Human Shield” in support of thugs and killers so they can take over Lebanon.
Comment by winter — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 9:03 pm
When all is said and done, our strategy will remain the same: Let them enter Finland and wait for their money to run-out. It should be very effective, as evidenced by the 5e I just spent on a bite-sized ‘mini-Kebab.’
Within a short time, they’ll be on the first boat to………..well, just about anywhere.
Comment by Kristian (in Espoo) — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 9:26 pm
ARMY
Oooh yay! Another lame propaganda video. This time coming from the American side. I don’t know which is side is the bigger barbarian. All I do know is that America is losing a war in Iraq based on lies and we are a joke on the world stage.
1,000 dead this week.
On topic. Finland needs to defend herself from whatever. She can get weapons from elsewhere because it’s obvious that won’t happen with a hypocritical America.
Comment by gopha — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 9:38 pm
“Maybe they were worried that someone would sell the technology to Russia.”
No way Russians have far better military technology than americans have(they just don’t have the money to make them). For example next time we make plane purchaces we should invest in these fuckers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Su-47
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_PAK_FA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_Project_1.44
Comment by Anonymous — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 10:42 pm
“Russians have far better military technology”
that so far the US technology has had no problem defeating.
But then again, why sell to Finland, the home of deployed “Human Shields” for Iran.
Whats your next bone head move? Actually fight for Iran?
Comment by winter — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 11:06 pm
No way Russians have far better military technology than americans have
Not really. Yet, if ever.
Comment by gopha — Sun, Feb 4th, 2007 @ 11:53 pm
“Russians have far better military technologyâ€Â
Well without debating that claim, they sure have a crappy record of air safety for having “far better military technology†and all three examples you give are aircraft.
At least in the US, our technical advances from military projects do trickle down into the civilian sector. I guess you could say that about Russia too, as far as AK-47s and RPGs go.
One thing is true, Russia will sell to most everyone, probably even to Finland as well. Then again, they might not like having their own equipment pointed back at them from their border.
Comment by Fred Fry — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 12:28 am
“….they sure have a crappy record of air safety….”
Yeah, but take-away the Vodka and then see.
“One thing is true, Russia will sell to most everyone….”
Maybe not Russia in every case. Underpaid military personnel and mobsters probably handle most of it.
Comment by Kristian (in Espoo) — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 12:46 am
What did you think? Finland was never offering to pay US for the missiles with old clothes. Many thanks to US for the help they sent Finland during the last WW. If it was’t for the US, Finland might not be in any position to request purchase of anything from anyone as an independent republic. For those who know their history, this may be a backhanded thank you. For the rest of you, it does not mean anything.
Comment by Seppo Ilmarinen — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 12:49 am
“Many thanks to US for the help they sent Finland during the last WW. [...] this may be a backhanded thank you.”
What do you mean? They sent us plenty of weapons. Unfortunately, they arrived at our next-door neighbor’s address.
Comment by Kristian (in Espoo) — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 1:32 am
What do you mean? They sent us plenty of weapons. Unfortunately, they arrived at our next-door neighbor’s address.
So? Ultimately they ended up here anyway.
My connoisseur’s nose is detecting a slight whiff of sarcasm in the bouquet of Seppo’s message, though.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 2:54 am
All the compliments to Tavja & Evki. Well done!
Comment by alo — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 10:54 am
#39
go cry me a river
Comment by Anonymous — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 11:26 am
“Well without debating that claim, they sure have a crappy record of air safety for having “far better military technology†and all three examples you give are aircraft.”
yes they are aircrafts but I am not talking about old n’ crappy Tupolev commercial airplanes.
Comment by Anonymous — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 11:28 am
They’re just scared
But then again, the whole nation lives on making their citizens scared.
Comment by Keksi — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 2:31 pm
The boys want their toys – and we want to play too..!
Comment by FinnFreak — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 3:00 pm
We should have not bought Hornets at all, but French Mirage and or Swedish JAS Gripen. USA is not a reliable supplier. And why finance US military industrial complex?
Comment by jtp — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 6:01 pm
“Not bought hornets at all?”
check with your military folks. Last I heard they were saying the Hornet buy was the most successful purchase ever made. In terms of combat ability and support they get from the USA.
Then reform your foreign policy. It sure sticks to be seen by all, surporting thugs and murder’s in Lebanon.
Comment by winter — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 6:18 pm
#32 “Whats your next bone head move? Actually fight for Iran?”
Well, spilling blood to promote Iran’s regional interests is effectively what the Bush-led USA has been doing in Iraq for close to four years.
That might be seen as poetic justice of sorts for when the United States effectively endorsed Saddam’s war against Iraq in the 1980s.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Mon, Feb 5th, 2007 @ 11:22 pm
“Saddam’s war against Iraq in the 1980s..”
Ah the one where he gassed the Kirds?
At least the USA does not go to war with the direct support of Iran. You did.
Comment by winter — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 1:12 am
#47 Yes, that’s when Saddam gassed the Kurds, and the United States did fuck all about it at the time,prefering instead to back him from the sidelines. It wasn’t until he stepped on the toes of other US geopolitical interests that the USA suddenly recognised his poor human rights record.
And if Finland’s involvement in the South Lebanon peacekeeping mission is so awful, why didn’t the United States do anything in the Security Council to block it?
Comment by Kimmo W. — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 8:50 am
I can’t decide who is more of a moron, Bush or “winter.”
Comment by RAVE THE DAVE — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 9:32 am
45: “murder’s”
:roll eyes:
Comment by RAVE THE DAVE — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 9:50 am
Finns are as morons as Tavja && Evki.. So are the leaders as the people. And you whining idiots check out the JAS, Euro fighter etc. parts and where they come from.
Comment by alo — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 9:57 am
“And you whining idiots check out the JAS, Euro fighter etc. parts and where they come from.”
Comment by FinnFreak — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 10:34 am
#51
“Finns are as morons as Tavja && Evki.. So are the leaders as the people. And you whining idiots check out the JAS, Euro fighter etc. parts and where they come from.”
Buhuu, sniff sniff
Comment by Anonymous — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 12:15 pm
Yes indeed, the Taurus is propably the way to go. On moment of crisis it has always been the German weapons we have been able to trust…
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2005/10/spain-orders-taurus-missiles/index.php
Comment by Taurus — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 1:11 pm
Taurus missile: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taurus_missile
…a German/Swedish air-launched cruise missile,
We know how trustworthy Swedish are and German … the same shit nowadays.
Comment by alo — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
However, Taurus: Engine Williams P8300-15 Turbofan
(Not even mention about the navigation/system)
Williams International is an American company. So, again you buy American. Buy Russian you communist or build your own if you can.
Comment by alo — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 2:36 pm
“So, again you buy American. Buy Russian you communist or build your own if you can.”
WaaWaa sniff sniff Waa
Comment by Anonymous — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 2:45 pm
alo how’s that Niinistö shrine building up? The sign of a true right-wing (or left-wing) nutjob, the cult of personality
Comment by Anonymous — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 2:48 pm
“And if Finland’s involvement in the South Lebanon peacekeeping mission is so awful, why didn’t the United States do anything in the Security Council to block it?”
Its called PC.
But then we get to sit on the side lines and critize you all to no end.
Now thats more fun than actually doing something. its it?
Comment by winter — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 3:18 pm
@alo
“However, Taurus: Engine Williams P8300-15 Turbofan
(Not even mention about the navigation/system)
Williams International is an American company. So, again you buy American. Buy Russian you communist or build your own if you can.”
Your point being? Does this make those satellites that NASA shoots into space commie satellites as they have Finnish made parts (and especially measurment equipment in space exploring probes) in them, can’t they make their own. Not to mention the mirror(s) for Hubbles successor is being perfected by a Finnish company.
And the US army is considering to buy those evil commie Patria/Hägglunds AMOS (advanced mortar system) weapon systems. Does this mean that US military is under the influence of the evil welfare state trolls? Can’t they make their own weapons?
Stop the press NASA is using commie parts and so are numerous of other organizations and companies too using such eviiiilll foreign made parts.
Comment by Blah — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 3:49 pm
Now, this discussion has become terribly boring.
I think I’ll go and watch some porn instead.
Comment by FinnFreak — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 3:59 pm
Regarding who has the money for these missiles and who does not:
Haven’t you thought that maybe it was financial reasons why the americans didn’t sell those missiles. See, it might endanger a new record trade deficit in making, if they started to sell those expensive missiles to foreign buyers rather than just launch em at foreign targets…
Comment by Happamia ovat sanoi kettu — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
In Finland, we use the meat missile. For occasional wintertime fun in the igloo.
Comment by Kristian (in Espoo) — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 8:23 pm
Ah the famous meat missile.
Lady wakes up, checks the meat missile.
1) If it is leaning left, she goes golfing with a left swing
2) If it is leaning right, she goes golfing with a right swing
3) If it is streight up, she is 15 minutes late to her golf game.
its for sometime fun as well.
Comment by winter — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 10:17 pm
who is more of a moron, Bush or “winter.â€Â
Hay, I take credit, where credit is due.
At least I don’t have any “Human shields” on direct deployment for Iran.
Comment by winter — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 5:07 am
Everybody is walking around today, cursing, saying “Fuck, I hate winter.”
Everybody.
Comment by DAVE THE RAVE — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
I say, I hate Global Warming, but then its so cold, that one holds little water.
Comment by winter — Thu, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 1:16 am
This is just a guess, but I would bet that the request was denied because of concerns of upsetting old man Putin. Weapon systems like this are intended to bypass and disrupt anti-aircraft defenses. And for another guess I would say that the states might be far more likely to sell patriots, or air to air planes and missiles, which could really only be used for the defense of Finland.
Comment by Daverino — Wed, May 16th, 2007 @ 12:38 am