What's new
What's new

What would it mean to manufacturing if Finland and Sweden joined NATO?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Thunderjet

Hot Rolled
Joined
Jun 24, 2019
I'm truly clueless regarding this question.

Why aren't they already members?

This looks as though it actually could happen, so how would this shift the NATO/ Russian relationship, if at all?

Would this alliance effect our manufacturing brothers in the E.U.?

What say you?
 

adammil1

Titanium
Joined
Mar 12, 2001
Location
New Haven, CT
I am kind of wondering if NATO membership means member states get to sit on their asses, and cut back on their military spending all the time knowing that if they are ever attacked by Putin, Uncle Sam will come in and kick Putin's ass all the way back to the stone age for them.

Look at Germany as a prime example. Those clowns have chronically underfunded their NATO obligations year after year. They sit back and know if you know what hits the fan the USA will save them so why spend their own money.

As of the time of this writing they are sending Putin about $1Billion dollars a day for oil and gas as a part of Putin's blood for oil scheme.

At the same time due to the great protective umbrella that NATO provides Germany gets to sleep comfortably at night even as they continue to fund the enemy. You see Germany knows that thanks to NATO (but really the awesome power the USA brings to the table) all the bombs, rape and murder that they have been subsidizing these past few months will be more or less contained to Ukraine or other non NATO countries that Putin wants to pick on. Pretty sad but true.

Countries like Sweden have long maintained very capable militaries and military production industries to protect against Russian invasion. Once they join NATO I would almost wonder if their military mfg capabilities go down as they no longer see the need to hold off Putin all by themselves.

Sent from my SM-J737V using Tapatalk
 

john.k

Diamond
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Location
Brisbane Qld Australia
Probably give a big boost to the manufacture of missiles and bombs.To be supplied free to Putins forces....free delivery included,too....now thats a deal you cant refuse.......I sure hope sleepy Joe is ready to push that red button......no point in vaporizing the May Day parade though,just Putins doubles there.
 

Gewehr 98

Hot Rolled
Joined
Dec 3, 2007
Location
Cinci.O
I don't see a shift in manufacturing if either joined NATO. Both use a lot of NATO compliant munitions already and have good quality indigenous manufacturing.

The Fins, with a lot of Swedish volunteers and arms, stacked a lot of Russians deep during the Winter and Continuation wars. Both have a history of having strong civil defense units and training.

Germany is a lost cause. Full of watermelons---green on the outside, red in the middle. They'll fold first if Putin decides to go that way.

I believe the mod for this sub forum is Finnish and served in their armed forces. Would be interesting to hear his take on this topic.
 

standardparts

Diamond
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
I believe Sweden and Finland still purchase Russian energy to some extent...same as many EU/NATO countries.

Maybe NATO could act like a buyers club for Russian energy since any money sent to Russia likely gets spent on military hardware to some extent.

Crazy times we live in.
 

boosted

Stainless
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Location
Portland, OR
I don't know all the specifics of Germany's ties with Russia, but I was surprised to learn that we (USA) are still allowed to buy Russian Titanium under sanction rules.

I suspect that the elites are always going to keep their deals making money during these times, and it's not just limited to our German friends.
 

john.k

Diamond
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Location
Brisbane Qld Australia
The Swedes designed and helped? build the appalling Australian Navy submarines .....the damn things have never done anything more than do tours around Sydney Harbour for politicians ........(politicians are too smart to submerge in one ,50/50 if it ever comes up again.)....Billions of $ wasted on trying to make the things work,now they are obsolete,which is preferable to being unworkable in govt speak.........Govt is always blaming the Chinese for hacking into Oz Defence secrets......only kept secret for the level of incompetence achieved.
 

BillE

Hot Rolled
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Location
Sydney Au
The Swedes designed and helped? build the appalling Australian Navy submarines .....the damn things have never done anything more than do tours around Sydney Harbour for politicians ........(politicians are too smart to submerge in one ,50/50 if it ever comes up again.)....Billions of $ wasted on trying to make the things work,now they are obsolete,which is preferable to being unworkable in govt speak.........Govt is always blaming the Chinese for hacking into Oz Defence secrets......only kept secret for the level of incompetence achieved.

Might be a few km out John, base here has been closed for close to a quarter of a century. :) With the earliest ones now 30+ years old, rather than obsolete, more than likely the crew are thinking of those Indos the other year in an equally fatigued pressure vessel.

Found out a couple years ago an old school classmate was involved in coming up with the noise suppression tech for those tin cans. I believe the USN had some interest in it at the time after one sub managed to fire a torpedo or two off Hawaii.
 

Trueturning

Diamond
Joined
Jul 2, 2019
The Swedes designed and helped? build the appalling Australian Navy submarines .....the damn things have never done anything more than do tours around Sydney Harbour for politicians ........(politicians are too smart to submerge in one ,50/50 if it ever comes up again.)....Billions of $ wasted on trying to make the things work,now they are obsolete,which is preferable to being unworkable in govt speak.........Govt is always blaming the Chinese for hacking into Oz Defence secrets......only kept secret for the level of incompetence achieved.

They make good stuff for themselves. If it is exactly the same then there should never be glaring problems. Would they be different? That they would have problems in Australia and not in Finland and Sweden does not make sense unless they are built different for Australia.

Hearing this story bothers me as we are there working with Australia to build Nuclear subs. I would hate to see similar problems.
 

standardparts

Diamond
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
They make good stuff for themselves. If it is exactly the same then there should never be glaring problems. Would they be different? That they would have problems in Australia and not in Finland and Sweden does not make sense unless they are built different for Australia.

Hearing this story bothers me as we are there working with Australia to build Nuclear subs. I would hate to see similar problems.

"we are there working with Australia to build Nuclear subs"....More like talking rather than working. Unless the Aussies buy some nice pre-owned nuke subs anything new is at the minimum 10 years out...according to most reports.

Nuclear-Powered Submarines for Australia? Maybe Not So Fast. - The New York Times
 

Scottl

Diamond
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Location
Eastern Massachusetts, USA
I'm not sure why so many are eager to poke the bear and possibly risk another world war.

Both nations currently have decent relations with Russia and joining NATO would likely be seen as an act of aggression.

There's a lot about the Ukraine conflict the media has not been telling. This didn't spring up overnight but has been almost a decade in the making and happened after diplomacy broke down with fault on BOTH sides.
 

Trueturning

Diamond
Joined
Jul 2, 2019
I'm not sure why so many are eager to poke the bear and possibly risk another world war.

Both nations currently have decent relations with Russia and joining NATO would likely be seen as an act of aggression.

There's a lot about the Ukraine conflict the media has not been telling. This didn't spring up overnight but has been almost a decade in the making and happened after diplomacy broke down with fault on BOTH sides.


Well that Russia has fomented the Donbas conflict is clear regardless of what got them to that point.

There is so much about practically everything screwed up which will never be known. We react based of what information we are given and the openness of government serving the people is nice on paper but in reality is not openly discussed.

There have been a lot of civilians targeted and killed in Ukraine. I recall genocide in Africa and how it was ignored. The loss of life and the displacement of the Ukrainians is a major problem and sets the country back quite a bit.

Russia is not suffering on such a scale as it is a mismatch of strength and power. I feel these people on both sides are cut from the same cloth as being very similarly minded people aside from which country they hail too. The Ukrainians have a advantage in that they have developed their military significantly with the help and support of western countries benefitting from their experience.

Russia has been neglectful of their military as a whole. They claim to have breakthrough weapons though. They claim to have working nuclear weapons also just as we claim.
They are not able to project power as competently as the United States and other western countries. The US has that capacity as a major goal and continues to have the capability. They have one Aircraft carrier to their name and it looks very old. I am not sure whether it is even in the Black Sea and if not they can not enter into it as Turkey has closed off the Bosporus straight to military ships.

Turkey has been supplying a good bit of drones to Ukraine. War is a boom to those who make all of these things. The drones have changed war.
 

Scottl

Diamond
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Location
Eastern Massachusetts, USA
Russia has been neglectful of their military as a whole. They claim to have breakthrough weapons though. They claim to have working nuclear weapons also just as we claim.
They are not able to project power as competently as the United States and other western countries. The US has that capacity as a major goal and continues to have the capability. They have one Aircraft carrier to their name and it looks very old. I am not sure whether it is even in the Black Sea and if not they can not enter into it as Turkey has closed off the Bosporus straight to military ships.

As I said, we are being fed a lot of misinformation. The idea that Russia is weak is BS designed to make the risk of us getting involved militarily seem small. Far from being weak however they are currently ranked as #2 with USA being #1 and China being #3.

2022 United States Military Strength

2022 Russia Military Strength

2022 China Military Strength

As for having only one aircraft carrier many consider them obsolete in a contest between major powers and that they are mainly valuable for projecting power against weaker far away nations, the Mideast and Africa coming to mind. China only has 2 despite the fact that they could easily build more if they so desired.

Also, Ukraine is easily within reach of Russian airbases, rendering carriers unnecessary in this case.

"The most persistent sound which reverberates through man's history is the beating of war drums."
Arthur Koestler​
 

Thunderjet

Hot Rolled
Joined
Jun 24, 2019
Both nations currently have decent relations with Russia and joining NATO would likely be seen as an act of aggression.

I'll take your word for it, but I can also see those counties saying:

"What's to keep this unbalanced dictator from pulling this shit on us?"
 

CarbideBob

Diamond
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Location
Flushing/Flint, Michigan
Russia has gone out and said this would be bad.
They may not be happy getting slapped in the face in public.
The two countries may not like Russia telling them what they can and can not do so speaking out on this was likely a bad move on the chess board.

The whole world has gotten into bed with Russia as a supplier of many things. Turning this off just about impossible or very painful.
Bob
 

Trueturning

Diamond
Joined
Jul 2, 2019
As I said, we are being fed a lot of misinformation. As for having only one aircraft carrier many consider them obsolete in a contest between major powers. The idea that Russia is weak is BS designed to make the risk of us getting involved militarily seem small. Far from being weak however they are currently ranked as #2 with USA being #1 and China being #3.

2022 United States Military Strength

2022 Russia Military Strength

2022 China Military Strength

As for having only one aircraft carrier many consider them obsolete in a contest between major powers and that they are mainly valuable for projecting power against weaker far away nations, the Mideast and Africa coming to mind. China only has 2 despite the fact that they could easily build more if they so desired.

Also, Ukraine is easily within reach of Russian airbases, rendering carriers unnecessary in this case.

"The most persistent sound which reverberates through man's history is the beating of war drums."
Arthur Koestler​

Yes true all of this. Russia is nothing to take lightly.

“ As I said, we are being fed a lot of misinformation.”

I agree on this point too.

“ As for having only one aircraft carrier many consider them obsolete in a contest between major powers”

Yes especially those who say all that and still mange to build some themselves. Some think that Navies should only have submarines. Not everyone has a lot of experience building them and operating them.

US has the Carrier groups and they are groups with layers of protection for them. It is said that missiles will destroy anything ship wise. This even though there are counter measures and high experience which the United States Navy has pioneered. Being set against a equal adversary of equal strength or near it has not really occurred since WW2.

It was thought that because of Japan having more Carriers and superior planes with their groups that they would prevail after Pearl Harbor. That proved wrong. Sure things might appear such yet the reality is often different.

The United States has extensive history with Carrier groups and the developments of new missile systems are factored into providing acceptable defense of these groups.

It is hard to know what disinformation is unless there is a valid way to identify it. Often other disinformation is offered as a explanation. It rather depends on how honest authority is and whether they are in fact trust worthy. I guess that means there is a hard road to travel then. One can get a sense from questions directed at authority about massive problems or failures that honesty answering questions is not a priority.

The way Russia chooses to fight a war is very bad and everyone knows that. It distracts from what caused all of this to peak. Likely Russia saw a opening seeing a weakened leadership in the United States.
 

Scottl

Diamond
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Location
Eastern Massachusetts, USA
I'll take your word for it, but I can also see those counties saying:

"What's to keep this unbalanced dictator from pulling this shit on us?"

Because ... neither of these countries have had a coup to replace a democratically elected leader on good terms with Russia with one aggressively hostile to Russia and Russians.

Because ... neither of these countries have persecuted Russian speaking minorities within their borders, as happened in the Donbass, eventually leading to a military revolt within those regions.

The way Russia chooses to fight a war is very bad and everyone knows that. It distracts from what caused all of this to peak. Likely Russia saw a opening seeing a weakened leadership in the United States.

The way the media TELLS US Russia chooses to fight a war is very bad. The reality is still possibly different. In the early days "news" organizations were showing clips from video games and even from an old Steven Seagal movie and passing them off as actual events in Ukraine. Now we are shown pictures of bombed out cities that MAY have been taken recently in Ukraine or MAY be old footage from Kosovo or elsewhere, possibly even from Lebanon.
 

standardparts

Diamond
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Lots of "stirring shit" going on. Lots of grift likely also what with all the money and material being dumped on Ukraine.

"Speaking on Friday, Britain's Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said that the Russian president might declare a new war against the world's 'Nazis' at the parade which sees Moscow mark the end of Russia's involvement in the Second World War."

Our President seems to get all tongue tied when he's playing bad-ass.

Ben Wallace predicts Russia will use parade on 9 May to announce mass mobilisation of population | Daily Mail Online
 

Thunderjet

Hot Rolled
Joined
Jun 24, 2019
The way the media TELLS US Russia chooses to fight a war is very bad. The reality is still possibly different. In the early days "news" organizations were showing clips from video games and even from an old Steven Seagal movie and passing them off as actual events in Ukraine. Now we are shown pictures of bombed out cities that MAY have been taken recently in Ukraine or MAY be old footage from Kosovo or elsewhere, possibly even from Lebanon.

So, is it your position that the Russians may not have destroyed hospitals, schools, apartment buildings and train stations?

Was all this stuff only props in an elaborate scheme to defraud the Russian government?

Footage from Lebanon? WTF?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.








 
Top