Shame On You, Dr. Phil

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;)

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)?

what you really want are JDAMS, big area killers. An entire Soviet army can be taken out with one JDAM.

Oh wait, as Human Shields for Iran, what the heck do you need missiles for?

human shields are not problem because human shields are our enemies!!!
human shilds are like shit!!!!

we need jdams to kill humand shields,communists, our russian enemies and hippies.

we need jdams to kill humand shields,communists, our russian enemies and hippies.

You forgot to mention those 100 ASEM punkers.

Once Sauli is prime minister, well get them..

“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.

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…

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)

#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.

“…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.

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.

Finland needs to build some nukes !

“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’.

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

“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.

“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.

Ooops. My error.

Not withstanding my mistake, It is still an attack weapon.

A very expensive one at that.

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.

#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.

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?)

“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.

Here is one reason why the US said no:

In her address to the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, Finnish President Tarja Halonen expressed the view that the War in Iraq was illegal.
Speaking on the opening day of the General Assembly, President Halonen said that the international community had failed before the war in Iraq began. “Conflicting national interests prevailed over common will”, she said.
“There was not enough commitment to act within the boundaries of Security Council resolutions. Some countries resorted to use of force which was not compatible with international law.”
At a press conference held before her speech, Halonen said that some kind of an international court would be needed to give a formal decision on the legality of the war.
“However, it is my own impression that the requirements of international law were not met”, the President said.

This did not help Finland’s chances either:

In Finland, Anneli Jäätteenmäki of the Center Party won the elections after she had accused her rival Paavo Lipponen, who was prime minister at the time, of allying neutral Finland with the United States in the war in Iraq during a meeting with President George W. Bush. Lipponen denied the claims and declared that “We support the UN and the UN Secretary-General.” Jäätteenmäki resigned as prime minister after 63 days in office amid accusations that she had lied about the leak of the documents about the meeting between Bush and Lipponen. The Finnish government stated that they took a stronger stand on the Iraq question at a meeting chaired by President Tarja Halonen.

The meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Foreign and Security Policy issued a statement according to which the use of force against Iraq would not be acceptable without the authority of the UN Security Council.

Then there is Finland not being a part of NATO. Not that NATO has any value any longer.

“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.

“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.

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.

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.

“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

“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?

No way Russians have far better military technology than americans have

Not really. Yet, if ever.

“Russians have far better military technology”

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.

“….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.

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.

“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.

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.

All the compliments to Tavja & Evki. Well done!

#39

go cry me a river

“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.

They’re just scared But then again, the whole nation lives on making their citizens scared.

The boys want their toys – and we want to play too..!

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?

“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.

#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.

“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.

#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?

I can’t decide who is more of a moron, Bush or “winter.”

45: “murder’s” :roll eyes:

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.

“And you whining idiots check out the JAS, Euro fighter etc. parts and where they come from.”

Taiwan or China..?

#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

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

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.

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.

“So, again you buy American. Buy Russian you communist or build your own if you can.”

WaaWaa sniff sniff Waa

alo how’s that Niinistö shrine building up? The sign of a true right-wing (or left-wing) nutjob, the cult of personality

“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?

@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.

Now, this discussion has become terribly boring.

I think I’ll go and watch some porn instead.

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…

In Finland, we use the meat missile. For occasional wintertime fun in the igloo.

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.

who is more of a moron, Bush or “winter.”

Hay, I take credit, where credit is due.

At least I don’t have any “Human shields” on direct deployment for Iran.

Everybody is walking around today, cursing, saying “Fuck, I hate winter.”

Everybody.

I say, I hate Global Warming, but then its so cold, that one holds little water.

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.