European Armaments Manufacturers

[HisArpy]

Do you ever read what you're replying too?

No one denies the defence spending of the past. Allies bought American, not because it was always the best ( yes some is, but not single type of equipment) , but because the US has a great arms manufacturing sector.

Now Trump has been pushing for years to get the EU etc to purchase more. Why? well the EU buys mostly from the US. Now with the tariffs, insults lack of respect and the lack of US assistance when needed, the EU has said ok, we can't depend upon the US, the US is pushing us away, so we'll make our own.

And Trump never saw it coming....

Second rate is still second rate whether you loudly shout TRUMP!!!! or not.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Second rate is still second rate whether you loudly shout TRUMP!!!! or not.

Russia had a lot of second rate equipment in WW2, where Germany had the Rolls Royce of equipment. As Stalin once said: "Quantity has a quality all its own."

My thoughts are to not buy any of your shit, then you can either attack, or shut the fuck up about where I chose to buy.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Second rate is still second rate whether you loudly shout TRUMP!!!! or not.

I'm sorry. I'm ROTFLMAO. I bet Trump didn't expect THIS particular reaction.

American defense companies plan European poduction shift to bypass US weapons restrictions​

Facing mounting challenges from restrictive US trade policies, major (American) defense manufacturers are exploring European production alternatives to maintain global competitiveness and support international defense needs. These companies are multinationals, and they're driven by the bottom line, not patriotism. More than likely, all this stuff by Trump has blindsided them as well as everyone else and it's going to cost these big corporations billions, esp. the US military-industrial complex thats been raking it in hand over fist with all the sales as a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine - and its not just sales to Ukraine. Now all those lovely European sales are not going to go to them, but to European companies. Oh woe is me. All I'll say is, remember JFK. Those who trifle with the big boys often find themselves targets. And Trump may be a billionaire but to these big companies he's just another inconvenient politician.

During recent meetings, leaders of major American defense companies have discussed plans to relocate production to Europe to avoid restrictions tied to the US President Donald Trump’s administration’s policies, says Chairman of the New Energy of Ukraine Alliance Valerii Borovyk, UkrInform reports. Reports have emerged that the US defense corporation Lockheed Martin may face billions in losses after a number of countries refused to purchase F-35 aircraft due to the US trade wars, US President Donald Trump’s foreign policy, and threats to invade Canada and Greenland. Meanwhile, Airbus is promoting Eurofighter Typhoon Tranche 5 as an alternative to F-35s. His claims come during an online segment at the Ukraine’s Role and Place in Shaping the European Security and Defense System roundtable.

The military expert mentions that he is currently in Europe, where he held meetings with representatives from several leading global defense companies from the US, Poland, the UK, and Germany. Borovyk adds that while he could not reveal the specific names of the companies, he had met with the leadership of one of the largest American companies in the world. “They are all currently thinking about relocating production to Europe. They understand that they are facing significant problems obtaining export permits for their products. Therefore, everyone is considering how to help Ukraine effectively, while also figuring out how to avoid the impact of their own administration’s policies,” he explains. According to him, American arms manufacturers are currently exploring the possibility of “integrating with others” and setting up production in Europe—”not in Ukraine, but in neutral countries”—so they can contribute to the Russian-Ukrainian war with their technologies and continue to develop them.

And of course make big bucks out of European defence spending which they will be unable to do if they remain in the US. Can't see it wrking that well tho. Europeans will be reluctant to invest in ANY American military technology goimg forward. And mostly, there ARE alternatives.

https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/03...tion-shift-to-bypass-us-weapons-restrictions/

Opps......

 

[ChloeTzang]

Nothing second rate about the Saab Viggen, especially when compared to a cut down f35. Nothing second rate about Leopard and Chieftan Tanks, both have been proving themselves in Ukraine. Nothing second-rate about Storm Shadow missiles, just ask Vladimir Putin. Europe has learned enough from history to realise that the US hasn't changed its spots. It will expect it allies to help when the US feels threatened, but will not reciprocate unless the US is directly threatened. What Trump has done is to tear off the blinkers. That is a good thing, Europe has been kidding itself that NATO was a real alliance. In reality, the reliability of the US as an ally has been slipping away for decades. Back in the eighties Al Haig was talking about a "Nuclear War, limited to Europe, being a winnable proposition."

Gripen-E is actually a pretty good aircraft, cost-effective, easy to maintain and rugged and well designed enought that it can operate from anywhere. Rafale is different, but again, capable fighter. Ditto Eurofighter. A lot of the F35 purchases were due to political factors, it's not really that great an aircraft. And Europe will not be fighting the US. Those fighters are more than capable of fighting the Russians.

Tanks - the new Leopard and Challenger 3 are great, as is the South Korean K2 Black Panther. Ukraine and Rheinmetall will be building the new Panther KF51 main battle tank.

And yes, Trump has torn off the blinkers alright. Europe WILL rearm, and Europe IS a superpower that will far outclass the USA in military strength when they get going. Europe has been quiescient since WW2, but let us not ever forget that it was European countries who colonised and ruled the entire world, and that wasn't by being pussies. Once Europe has remilitarized, once govts have changed and Farage, the AfD, LePen and others are in power, and the migrant waves are returned to their homelands (a process which will probably make our deportations look positively benign), the rest of the world better watch out. A resurgent conservative Europe is something to be feared, which is why the woke left has been doing their best to bring Europe to its knees with floods of third world migrant scum.

Now they know that the US cannot be relied upon, it makes sense that their arms supplies should not come from a place that might cut off the supply of both the weapons and spare parts. Mr Trump told Europe point blank, you may not always be our ally. He proved this with his willingness to sell out Ukraine. His Envoy referred to the North Atlantic Treaty as just a piece of paper and likened it to Neville Chamberlaine's "piece of paper" in 1939. Of course, the Europeans are going to look to countries whose interests are more closely aligned with their own to supply arms. It has nothing to do with denying Trump. It is recognising what for them is the new reality.

Exactly. There may be some residual US arms sales to Europe, but as European defence industry scales up, they will cut the knees out from under US sales. Countries like Australia will look to Europe, not the US (that change of submarines is looking like a big mistake now), and given Israel's ties to the US, Middle Eastern countries may well start looking to Europe, Ukraine and Turkey rather than the USA as European and Ukrainian military production scales up.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Russia had a lot of second rate equipment in WW2, where Germany had the Rolls Royce of equipment. As Stalin once said: "Quantity has a quality all its own."

My thoughts are to not buy any of your shit, then you can either attack, or shut the fuck up about where I chose to buy.

Drones certainly seem to be a great leveller on thne battlefield, altho artillery and IFV's also remain critical.

 

[Politruk]

A resurgent conservative Europe is something to be feared, which is why the woke left has been doing their best to bring Europe to its knees with floods of third world migrant scum.

A resurgent conservative Europe would be dangerous mainly to Europeans.

 

[ChloeTzang]

A resurgent conservative Europe would be dangerous mainly to Europeans.

LOL. Europeans have always been dangerous to Europeans. Just, they're mor dangerous to everyone else.

 

[Politruk]

LOL. Europeans have always been dangerous to Europeans. Just, they're mor dangerous to everyone else.

But they wouldn't have the option, any more, to be dangerous to anyone else. There is no colonizable world left.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Drones certainly seem to be a great leveller on thne battlefield, altho artillery and IFV's also remain critical.

True. Ukraine is now, in my opinion the expert in a new style of warfare. The US would do well to continue support, if only to observe what and how Ukraine has changed the face of ground combat.

 

[ChloeTzang]

True. Ukraine is now, in my opinion the expert in a new style of warfare. The US would do well to continue support, if only to observe what and how Ukraine has changed the face of ground combat.

That's a really good point, because it's gpne way beyond attaching a drone team to a battalion or a company, which was how they started out. Now it's Drone Platoons and Companies and Battalions and Brigades, integrating their operations with other combat units all along the front and coordinating with them. New formations and integrared tactics, with assault formations working with drone units as an integrated assault force. Way more complexity, all sorts of drone variants for different missions, and ground drones as well as air drones. Ukraine has left everyone else behind on this one and the real benefits will go to those who are working closely with Ukraine and learning the lessons. You can bet the SAS and SBS are in there and picking all this up for the Brits. They're not shy about getting into it and they've been working with the Ukrainians for well over a decade now. I suspect the US military is getting left behind on this one. Hegseth is obviously not that interested in Ukraine and I suspect they're focused on fighting the last war against China. Whereas China is going for drones bigtime - they're taking notes and learning lessons.....

 

[DeYaKen]

And yet these EXACT SAME NATIONS rely on the US to bail their asses out because US arms and equipment are the best in the world.

Second rate is second rate no matter how "good" someone claims it to be.

The Us is the only country in NATO to have ever invoked Article 5 of the treaty, which basically says that an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. They wanted the other member states to bail their asses out in Afghanistan. They got that support. Contrast that with the Falklands war where British Sovereign territory was invaded. Britain asked the US to provide nothing more than AWAKS cover. The US flatly refused. seems pretty obvious who bails whose asses out. Now if you want to talk about second rate, I would say that a weapon system that is not up to the specification offered is second rate. Your President told the world that is what they get when buying US weapons systems. "We sell our allies cut down versions of our systems, because they may not always be our allies." Ask yourself what is best for Europe: a weapon system that is what they think it is and can be used as they see fit, or a weapon system that is not up to the same spec as that used by the vendor country and can only be used if the vendor country approves its use? It's a no-brainer.

 

[ChloeTzang]

The Us is the only country in NATO to have ever invoked Article 5 of the treaty, which basically says that an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. They wanted the other member states to bail their asses out in Afghanistan. They got that support. Contrast that with the Falklands war where British Sovereign territory was invaded. Britain asked the US to provide nothing more than AWAKS cover. The US flatly refused. seems pretty obvious who bails whose asses out. Now if you want to talk about second rate, I would say that a weapon system that is not up to the specification offered is second rate. Your President told the world that is what they get when buying US weapons systems. "We sell our allies cut down versions of our systems, because they may not always be our allies. Ask yourself what is best for Europe, a weapon system that is what they think it is and can be used as they see fit, or a weapon system that is not up to the same spec as that used by the vendor country and can only be used if the vendor country approves its use? It's a no brainer.

Europe CAN produce weapons systems that are as good or better than the USA. They just haven't really made the attempt, secure under the American umbrella. That's now changed, and between Putin and Trump, Europe will remilitarize and quickly. They also have the military expertise and experience and can scale this up. Trump has side-lined America in the long term, and ensured that the American Century is over.

Big question for me is will Europe embark on its own serious Space Program. That's where the future really is.

 

[HisArpy]

The Us is the only country in NATO to have ever invoked Article 5 of the treaty, which basically says that an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. They wanted the other member states to bail their asses out in Afghanistan. They got that support. Contrast that with the Falklands war where British Sovereign territory was invaded. Britain asked the US to provide nothing more than AWAKS cover. The US flatly refused. seems pretty obvious who bails whose asses out. Now if you want to talk about second rate, I would say that a weapon system that is not up to the specification offered is second rate. Your President told the world that is what they get when buying US weapons systems. "We sell our allies cut down versions of our systems, because they may not always be our allies." Ask yourself what is best for Europe: a weapon system that is what they think it is and can be used as they see fit, or a weapon system that is not up to the same spec as that used by the vendor country and can only be used if the vendor country approves its use? It's a no-brainer.

I disagree. Do I have to remind you of the famous incidents we call WWI and WWII?

 

[HisArpy]

Europe CAN produce weapons systems that are as good or better than the USA. They just haven't really made the attempt, secure under the American umbrella. That's now changed, and between Putin and Trump, Europe will remilitarize and quickly. They also have the military expertise and experience and can scale this up. Trump has side-lined America in the long term, and ensured that the American Century is over.

Big question for me is will Europe embark on its own serious Space Program. That's where the future really is.

Here's a better question: Once Europe rearms itself to the nines, who are they going to use those weapons against?

Answer: Each other. Just as they traditionally have.

As long as stupid people put politics over people, that's the inevitable result.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Here's a better question: Once Europe rearms itself to the nines, who are they going to use those weapons against?

Answer: Each other. Just as they traditionally have.

As long as stupid people put politics over people, that's the inevitable result.

Nah, Putin has demonstrated who they will need to be used against. Trump threatening Denmark and Canada adds a new twist.

Add in that it may be necessary at some point to recolonize much of Africa to inflict civilization on them and there you are......

 

[ChloeTzang]

Good doc on the Gripen

 

[DeYaKen]

I disagree. Do I have to remind you of the famous incidents we call WWI and WWII?

Do I have to remind you that the US waited to see who was winning before joining the fray on both occasions? WWII proves my point completely. The US stayed out of the war and was busy making money out of it right up to the point where they could no longer deny that they were under attack. They tolerated several attacks on their shipping right up to Pearl Harbour. Even then, if Japan had not allied itself with Germany, it is doubtful that the US would have moved into Europe. The fact that they were drawn into the war was a bonus that definitely shortened the conflict, so you could say that attacking the US was a big mistake for the Axis forces. However, if you are trying to claim that the US came riding over the horizon to rescue the Europeans, you are living in a dream world. The US was dragged kicking and screaming into the war. Until they were attacked, they would not even supply aircraft that the UK had bought and paid for.

 

[HisArpy]

Nah, Putin has demonstrated who they will need to be used against. Trump threatening Denmark and Canada adds a new twist.

Add in that it may be necessary at some point to recolonize much of Africa to inflict civilization on them and there you are......

1. One NATO incursion against Russia, even in defense of a NATO nation's sovereign soil, will start WWIII. Russia is already at the breaking point because of a war Putin stupidly began because of how weak Biden was and the rest of the world following him down into the well of social dementia. Adding more military pressure on Russia can have only ONE very sad ending.

I firmly believe the only way the Ukraine war ends is if Putin is removed from power by his own KGB. Thinking Europe can act before that happens is a deadly idea for millions of innocent people.

2. The entire point of the US tariffs is to get foreign nations to treat the US as something other than a piggy bank. If they trade fairly with us, we'll trade fairly with them. If they believe they can get better stuff elsewhere, go for it because that's what free trade is all about. OTOH, doing it out of spite or because of a TDS inspired temper tantrum is about the most stupid thing any government can do.

3. I'm just saying that when it comes to armaments, the US is it. Everything else is second best. Proven track record, existing manufacturing capability, R&D, it's all ready to go. Whereas the rest of the world needs to tool up and hope they come up with a winner.

 

[HisArpy]

Do I have to remind you that the US waited to see who was winning before joining the fray on both occasions? WWII proves my point completely. The US stayed out of the war and was busy making money out of it right up to the point where they could no longer deny that they were under attack. They tolerated several attacks on their shipping right up to Pearl Harbour. Even then, if Japan had not allied itself with Germany, it is doubtful that the US would have moved into Europe. The fact that they were drawn into the war was a bonus that definitely shortened the conflict, so you could say that attacking the US was a big mistake for the Axis forces. However, if you are trying to claim that the US came riding over the horizon to rescue the Europeans, you are living in a dream world. The US was dragged kicking and screaming into the war. Until they were attacked, they would not even supply aircraft that the UK had bought and paid for.

Dragged?

Yes, you do need a refresher course in world history.

 

[ChloeTzang]

1. One NATO incursion against Russia, even in defense of a NATO nation's sovereign soil, will start WWIII. Russia is already at the breaking point because of a war Putin stupidly began because of how weak Biden was and the rest of the world following him down into the well of social dementia. Adding more military pressure on Russia can have only ONE very sad ending.

The point is NOT a NATO incursion into Russia. The point is to build a credible and effective EU military that will be capabe of wiping out any Russian incursion into NATO countries - including in future Ukraine, a democratic Belarus, Georgia and Armenia.

The end result of this war Putin has launched is that the Russian Federation will collapse, Muscovy will resume it's place as a post-colonial country without the resources of its colonies to loot and exploit, and the EU can step in as needed, with the emerging states aligning with China or the EU....

1. I firmly believe the only way the Ukraine war ends is if Putin is removed from power by his own KGB. Thinking Europe can act before that happens is a deadly idea for millions of innocent people.

True. AT some point the Russian economic and military collapse will result in Putin's removal and the inevitable disintegration of the Russian Federation. All sorts of options there, but Russian nuclear weapons and facilitiies will need to be secured safely.

2. The entire point of the US tariffs is to get foreign nations to treat the US as something other than a piggy bank. If they trade fairly with us, we'll trade fairly with them. If they believe they can get better stuff elsewhere, go for it because that's what free trade is all about. OTOH, doing it out of spite or because of a TDS inspired temper tantrum is about the most stupid thing any government can do.

Yeah, the whole off shoring thig was just looting the USA and strip mining our industry.

3. I'm just saying that when it comes to armaments, the US is it. Everything else is second best. Proven track record, existing manufacturing capability, R&D, it's all ready to go. Whereas the rest of the world needs to tool up and hope they come up with a winner.

Thing is, based on what Trump has said and done, they WILL tool up. It won't happen overnight, but Europe will increasingly abandon US weapons systems and revert to their own. Ukraine is leading the way there, and the funding fr Ukraine is boosting all the EU defense manufacturers.

 

[DeYaKen]

Dragged?

Yes, you do need a refresher course in world history.

Yes Dragged, you definitely need a history lesson. What dragged the US into the war, Pearl Harbour. Up until the point where American lives were lost on a large scale, the US steadfastly refused to get involved. WWII started in September 1939. The US joined the fray in December 1941. That is a full five months after Germany's big mistake of turning on their Russian allies.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I disagree. Do I have to remind you of the famous incidents we call WWI and WWII?

Oh like how the USA joined in 1917, and the troops got there in 1918. The US didn't win WW1, it got there at the end.

WW2 was a joint effort,and the Russians bore the brunt of it. Japan surrendered not because of the A-bomb,but because Stalin agreed to join the US in the advance on the home islands.

What WW2 did was make America a superpower of manufacturing. Which lead directly to the USA's birth as a superpower. You know that guy, Einstein who sent FDR the letter about splitting the atom, and the other guy, Oppen something who managed to build the device. Leaving America to claim ownership of the most powerful weapon in existence. Prior to that England was the super power.

Lets add another subject to the HisArpy barrel of ignorance.

 

[domroger]

Do I have to remind you that the US waited to see who was winning before joining the fray on both occasions? WWII proves my point completely. The US stayed out of the war and was busy making money out of it right up to the point where they could no longer deny that they were under attack. They tolerated several attacks on their shipping right up to Pearl Harbour. Even then, if Japan had not allied itself with Germany, it is doubtful that the US would have moved into Europe. The fact that they were drawn into the war was a bonus that definitely shortened the conflict, so you could say that attacking the US was a big mistake for the Axis forces. However, if you are trying to claim that the US came riding over the horizon to rescue the Europeans, you are living in a dream world. The US was dragged kicking and screaming into the war. Until they were attacked, they would not even supply aircraft that the UK had bought and paid for.

War was not declared on Germany until after Germany declared war on the US.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

War was not declared on Germany until after Germany declared war on the US.

But it should be pointed out FDR was fully in favour of joining in 1939. It was those damn isolationists who prevented out right involvement leading to the "lend lease" agreement, etc. I guess those isolationists descendants are at it again.

 

[Cogan]

Good doc on the Gripen

I did my military service as a mechanic on the J35 Draken in the mid 80's.
We filled up gas and reload the old plane in under eight minutes on the side of a normal road. The time between touchdown and lift off had to be under ten minutes.