4 ms·

It also further aligns them with the US military complex team which - anyone who’s watching Ukraine knows is the right pick. Gripen is cool but Finland needs a

It also further aligns them with the US military complex team which - anyone who’s watching Ukraine knows is the right pick. Gripen is cool but Finland needs a strategic partnership with the US. Sweden is already their best friend and they certainly can’t rely on the big EU countries to not try to not hurt Putins feelings instead of helping a ally in an existential struggle

throwawaysleep 4y ago
Sweden has yet to prove it has any value as an ally either.
- wahern 4y ago
  Nearly $1 billion USD in assistance to Ukraine, more than half of which is military material, isn't nothing.
  - ralusek 4y ago
    materiel*
- bee_rider 4y ago
  The two countries are moving into NATO together, they are practically married.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > The two countries are moving into NATO together, they are practically married. I think this is what you meant, but it could be misread: the former is a sign, not the cause, of the latter. They’ve had aligned security policy for a long time, which is reflected in their joint decision to choose to apply to NATO.
    - enra 4y ago
      This time it was Finland that pushing them both to NATO. Finland had friendly pack with Sweden that if either of them decide to pursue NATO membership they would let the other one know. Last year by the time Finnish leadership and people were pretty much decided on NATO, Sweden was just starting their discourse so they had to catch up not be left behind. Now somewhat ironically because of Sweden, Turkey has been delaying and objecting the membership. Finland has also kept with updating equipment and keeping the conscription military service these past 100 years, Sweden ended their conscription and mostly been downsizing their military.
      - progre 4y ago
        Conscription is starting up again.
      - georgeecollins 4y ago
        That is probably true, but it is worth noting that when people war gamed out a swift capture of any Baltic state (kind of like what happened in Crimea) one of the frequent moves of the Russian player was to capture Gotland, which made NATO reinforcement very difficult. Also, it showed that while Sweden has a capable air force and good naval assets in the baltic, it still might have trouble defending Gotland in the future. I don't think anyone thinks an attack on Gotland was ever likely, and it certainly isn't now, but if Russia's goal was to bring back all the former states of the Soviet Union, the Baltic states are on that list. And that gets pretty difficult for those two countries to stay neutral. Finland was once part of Russia too and they have a contentious history.
  - trashtester 4y ago
    At the moment, Turkey is blocking Sweden from joining, but not Finland.
    - bee_rider 4y ago
      I’m pretty sure Finland and Sweden are sticking together though, at least that’s what I read last. Finland seems like a good get for NATO, so it is nice that they are willing to stick with their neighbor.
      - trashtester 4y ago
        A few days ago, Finland was considering going alone, now it appears they will wait for Sweden to be accepted. At least for a while. Anyway, both Sweden and Finland have much to offer NATO.
- bell-cot 4y ago
  Geography suggests that Sweden would be an extremely reliable ally for Finland in any conflict with Russia. Assuming that Sweden didn't want to be the next domino to fall.
kevinlou 4y ago
I do feel a little bit sad that Saab's Gripen wasn't chosen - it seems to do well in adverse conflict conditions (takeoff/landing from public roads, etc.). The adoption of the F-35 instead of the Gripen also shifts their military doctrine a bit.
- bee_rider 4y ago
  Also canards look cool as heck.
- jabl 4y ago
  As a Finn, I trust that the procurement organization made the correct choice, and from what I can gather as a lay person the F-35 seems like a significantly more capable platform. However, the Gripen is certainly a very interesting aircraft, like you say, designed to be operated from makeshift airstrips and maintained by conscripts. It's also amazing how a small country like Sweden with a fairly limited budget has managed to create a competitive fighter. Though the engine and many of the weapons systems are US or European, but still. I'd like to think that if F-35 weren't available, Gripen would have been a very strong, if not the strongest, contender.
- gggggg5 4y ago
  >it seems to do well in adverse conflict conditions (takeoff/landing from public roads, etc.) This is largely an irrelevant capability, it's easy and cheap to build lots of runways.
kcplate 4y ago
This is probably one of the most important considerations, pretty much all of Finland’s recent military hardware updates even prior to the NATO bid was sought out for intentional compatibility with NATO. The Finnish as a culture are pretty pragmatic in my experience.
- jabl 4y ago
  Generally since the end of the cold war NATO compatibility has been a requirement in military procurements. The only exceptions that come to mind is that in the early/mid 90'ies they bought a bunch of ex-DDR equipment at close to scrap prices, and in the mid-90'ies they bought the Buk air defence missile system from Russia (also very cheaply), AFAIU essentially to settle some outstanding debts from the cold war era bilateral trade deals.
Animats 4y ago
This F-35 decision was made back in 2021. Since then, Finland has given up independent neutrality and is joining NATO. Much to the annoyance of Russia. Finland fought two wars against the USSR in the last century. Finland may have to fight another one. They're not getting those aircraft as status symbols.
yobbo 4y ago
If nothing else, US would do its best to prevent F-35s falling into Russian hands. In that way, F-35s grouped in bases close to the border is an effective trip-wire.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

throwawaysleep 4y ago

Sweden has yet to prove it has any value as an ally either.

wahern 4y ago
Nearly $1 billion USD in assistance to Ukraine, more than half of which is military material, isn't nothing.
- ralusek 4y ago
  materiel*
bee_rider 4y ago
The two countries are moving into NATO together, they are practically married.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > The two countries are moving into NATO together, they are practically married. I think this is what you meant, but it could be misread: the former is a sign, not the cause, of the latter. They’ve had aligned security policy for a long time, which is reflected in their joint decision to choose to apply to NATO.
  - enra 4y ago
    This time it was Finland that pushing them both to NATO. Finland had friendly pack with Sweden that if either of them decide to pursue NATO membership they would let the other one know. Last year by the time Finnish leadership and people were pretty much decided on NATO, Sweden was just starting their discourse so they had to catch up not be left behind. Now somewhat ironically because of Sweden, Turkey has been delaying and objecting the membership. Finland has also kept with updating equipment and keeping the conscription military service these past 100 years, Sweden ended their conscription and mostly been downsizing their military.
    - progre 4y ago
      Conscription is starting up again.
    - georgeecollins 4y ago
      That is probably true, but it is worth noting that when people war gamed out a swift capture of any Baltic state (kind of like what happened in Crimea) one of the frequent moves of the Russian player was to capture Gotland, which made NATO reinforcement very difficult. Also, it showed that while Sweden has a capable air force and good naval assets in the baltic, it still might have trouble defending Gotland in the future. I don't think anyone thinks an attack on Gotland was ever likely, and it certainly isn't now, but if Russia's goal was to bring back all the former states of the Soviet Union, the Baltic states are on that list. And that gets pretty difficult for those two countries to stay neutral. Finland was once part of Russia too and they have a contentious history.
- trashtester 4y ago
  At the moment, Turkey is blocking Sweden from joining, but not Finland.
  - bee_rider 4y ago
    I’m pretty sure Finland and Sweden are sticking together though, at least that’s what I read last. Finland seems like a good get for NATO, so it is nice that they are willing to stick with their neighbor.
    - trashtester 4y ago
      A few days ago, Finland was considering going alone, now it appears they will wait for Sweden to be accepted. At least for a while. Anyway, both Sweden and Finland have much to offer NATO.
bell-cot 4y ago
Geography suggests that Sweden would be an extremely reliable ally for Finland in any conflict with Russia. Assuming that Sweden didn't want to be the next domino to fall.

kevinlou 4y ago

I do feel a little bit sad that Saab's Gripen wasn't chosen - it seems to do well in adverse conflict conditions (takeoff/landing from public roads, etc.). The adoption of the F-35 instead of the Gripen also shifts their military doctrine a bit.

bee_rider 4y ago
Also canards look cool as heck.
jabl 4y ago
As a Finn, I trust that the procurement organization made the correct choice, and from what I can gather as a lay person the F-35 seems like a significantly more capable platform. However, the Gripen is certainly a very interesting aircraft, like you say, designed to be operated from makeshift airstrips and maintained by conscripts. It's also amazing how a small country like Sweden with a fairly limited budget has managed to create a competitive fighter. Though the engine and many of the weapons systems are US or European, but still. I'd like to think that if F-35 weren't available, Gripen would have been a very strong, if not the strongest, contender.
gggggg5 4y ago
>it seems to do well in adverse conflict conditions (takeoff/landing from public roads, etc.) This is largely an irrelevant capability, it's easy and cheap to build lots of runways.

kcplate 4y ago

This is probably one of the most important considerations, pretty much all of Finland’s recent military hardware updates even prior to the NATO bid was sought out for intentional compatibility with NATO. The Finnish as a culture are pretty pragmatic in my experience.

jabl 4y ago
Generally since the end of the cold war NATO compatibility has been a requirement in military procurements. The only exceptions that come to mind is that in the early/mid 90'ies they bought a bunch of ex-DDR equipment at close to scrap prices, and in the mid-90'ies they bought the Buk air defence missile system from Russia (also very cheaply), AFAIU essentially to settle some outstanding debts from the cold war era bilateral trade deals.

Animats 4y ago

This F-35 decision was made back in 2021. Since then, Finland has given up independent neutrality and is joining NATO. Much to the annoyance of Russia. Finland fought two wars against the USSR in the last century. Finland may have to fight another one. They're not getting those aircraft as status symbols.

yobbo 4y ago

If nothing else, US would do its best to prevent F-35s falling into Russian hands. In that way, F-35s grouped in bases close to the border is an effective trip-wire.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]