Slashdot Mirror
EU Committee Issues Report On NSA Surveillance; Snowden To Testify
Qedward writes with word that the EU Parliament's Civil Liberties Committee published the draft of their report on the impact of dragnet surveillance by the NSA on EU citizens (PDF). Quoting CIO: "... Members of the European Parliament say that it is 'very doubtful that data collection of such magnitude is only guided by the fight against terrorism,' and that there may be other motives such as political and economic espionage. The document urges EU countries to take legal action against the breach of their sovereignty perpetrated through such mass surveillance programs."
The same committee voted today to allow Edward Snowden to testify before them in a special hearing.
nope false alert, not gonna happen.
The internet has grown up, and you should to.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Or, if they're going to have him testify, they have diplomats collect him and bring him in on a plain covered by immunity, move him around in diplomatic cars, and house him in diplomatic residences.
Do you *really* think that it is impossible to basically "fuck you" and bring him there safely if there's the political will?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
RTFA: The former US National Security Agency worker would testify by interactive video link from Russia, where he has been granted temporary asylum.
What if Snowden was a former employee/contractor for GCHQ, and he leaked documents illuminating GCHQ spying on the US, Russia, and other non European nations? Would the EU still allow him to testify, or would they be calling for him to return to face their courts?
They don't have telephones or Skype in Russia?
Of course they do, because part of the mandate is to look out for US commercial interests in general.
The problem is they use the same program to spy for the terrorists, as they do for the economic and political espionage.
Which means, unless the US is willing to carve out JUST the security stuff (which, they won't), every other country more or less has to block this program on the premise that it's just a widespread "spy on everybody, some of them might be security risks, some of it might be political intel, and some can be given to the corporations".
That's kind of the problem from the perspective of the rest of the world -- any form of cooperation with this spying has far broader ramifications than just national security.
Hell, people here routinely defend it, but increasingly you might see other world governments saying they won't allow you to do it any more (in which case, it will be done anyway, just in a more clandestine manner).
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
well you see, in soviet russia telephone have you
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Perhaps the EU members will think that.
However, there is a major difference between say, Germany and America. The difference is, the German public will freak out and actually take to the streets.
I am reasonably sure that Germany would exit the EU if such a program was installed.
Same is true for France. They say that France is one of the few countries who does democracy right. The government is scared shitless of the people. Not the other way around like in the US where people fear their government. Hell, in France they will burn an entire city over a small issue.
Of course in England, they are even more willing to give up their rights than Americans.
actually this is about the US stealing our economy and basically doing insider-trading/pre-knowledge trading, basically the US could face billions if not trillions of dollars in international sanctions (which will end up back where it belongs, in Europe)...
so once again, do some research before you say something retarded.
Nah, the Americans could tap into it. ;-)
The real tin-foil-hatters would say the US has injected a CG images into the stream to make him say different things. :-P
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
No way , it's not like broadband is every where in Russia, and Skype is not even remotely a possibility !
The real question is , will Microsoft shut down Skype for the NSA so he can't testify ?
This package Does Not Contain a Winner
They already kind of did that on 30C3 when Assange spoke: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzhtGvSflEk
The ultimate goal with government spying -- besides securing a multi-billion dollar cash flow that can be leveraged for personal gain -- is merely to build a warchest of options for prosecution, should government need to prosecute a citizen in the future. And by "need to prosecute", I mean need to silence, emprison, or murder. Now that there are enough crimes to make every citizen a criminal, this is entirely possible. Ayn Rand had it exactly right: the reason why the law is so absurdly complex is to ensure that every citizen can be prosecuted for something -- anything -- should the need arise.
Yes, in fact, I do. Political will tends to fade pretty quickly on the wrong end of a gun barrel.
Yeah, he's in Russia, possibly in an embassy somewhere. Good luck invading. There's still the possibility of dead-man information still unreleased. And his testimony will likely be public record, so the need to snoop it will be wasted effort. Even better, if they make it private, and the US reacts to something they should not have been privy to, well wouldn't that be the proof they've been looking for?
Or, if they're going to have him testify, they have diplomats collect him and bring him in on a plain covered by immunity, move him around in diplomatic cars, and house him in diplomatic residences.
The last time they thought that he was on a plane protected by diplomatic immunity, they grounded it and searched it at the request of the United States. That's also why Julian Assange is still stuck in the Ecuadorian embassy in London: The UK authorities have made it clear that they will pull him out of a diplomatic vehicle if they try to transport him to Ecuador.
I am officially gone from
It's a trap!!!
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
And you're giving him/her what he/she wants.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
If he goes anywhere in Europe, even with the host country's approval and protection, I wouldn't be surprised if he were snatched in a CIA black op.
If America is going to choose to 'point a gun' at the entire EU, then you can pretty much expect the entire EU to kick the US out of military bases, and generally GTFO of town.
The EU also has their own guns.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
There was a story a few years ago that showed Boeing was successful in derailing an Airbus deal by using espionage and hacking to gather intelligence on the Airbus proposal, allowing Boeing to cut-in the proposition with their own submissions, finally realizing the deal at the expense of Airbus.
So says the man from America. The country who's population literally could not care less that their own government is spying on them as well AND systematically removing their rights and dismantling their constitution.
But you go on and talk about how stupid and cowardly we in the EU are. After all, we can see how strong your back bone is. After all, it is not we who have the backbones to bomb brown people "into freedom".
RTFA: The former US National Security Agency worker would testify by interactive video link from Russia, where he has been granted temporary asylum.
Heh. Would be funny if the packets were routed via the US and patriotically "deep-inspected" by the NSA.
The invitation is going to be to testify over a video link, according to this pirate party MEP (and member of the LIBE committee).
Read TFA.
"Even if you are on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there" - Will Rogers
Make sure testifying doesn't violate the terms Putin laid out w.r.t. your visa ("No further harm to the US" yadda yadda).
If the EU wants to get your testimony they can damn well give you political asylum first.
To deny you asylum yet claim your testimony is important, is disingenuous.
Or, if they're going to have him testify, they have diplomats collect him and bring him in on a plain covered by immunity, move him around in diplomatic cars, and house him in diplomatic residences.
The "Assange solution"? How is that working out?
Do you *really* think that it is impossible to basically "fuck you" and bring him there safely if there's the political will?
Its totally possible, as long as various European nations don't want to honor their treaty obligations and don't care about insults to allies. (I thought Europeans were always in favor of honoring treaties?) That can end up working both ways too, and not always in the way of a fantasy great triumphant either. Always keep in mind that the arrival of the future won't stop anytime soon, and it almost always has surprises in store. You may want friends around to help meet some of those surprises.
Is it 1914 all over again?
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Except, at the heart of this is, has America lived up to their treaty obligations or cared about insults to allies?
If the answer is "no", then finding out the scope of this might be considered something which trumps how America feels about letting him testify.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
It's worse than that. The EU is where the US gets its guns from, because the US is too incompetent to make its own guns any more. Most police departments use Glocks, which come from Austria, and the US military is going to use an H-K rifle from Germany for their next-generation assault rifle. The US military already uses the Beretta M-9 for its standard sidearm: Beretta is an Italian company. All the best guns come from the EU (or Switzerland, which is surrounded by the EU): FAL in Belgium with their P90 submachine gun and F2000 rifle (standard rifle used by many countries' armies including Pakistan), H-K in Germany with their MP5 submachine gun used by lots of militaries and police departments including probably every US SWAT team, Glock in Austria, SIG in Switzerland, HS in Croatia, Steyr in Britain, I'm sure there's lots more. The US gunmakers mostly only make historical replicas (e.g. Colt 45s from the 1800s) and copies of aging and obsolete guns like the 1911 and the AR-15. When they want something new and innovative, they import it from Europe and rebadge it (like the Springfield XD series, made by HS in Croatia).
A quick synopsis (so may contain stuff to quibble over) but the meat appears to be the action list (read the original document - link in article - for the rest):
Action 1: Adopt the data protection package
Action 2: Set up an overall agreement ensuring 'proper redress mechanisms' for EU citizens where data is passed to the US for law enforcement purposes.
Action 3: Suspend 'safe harbour' (covering personal data) until the US comply with 'EU highest standards'
Action 4: Suspend the 'TFTP' (Terrorist Finance Tracking Package) until a) Action 2 complete b) the EU have looked into it
Action 5: Worth quoting in full: "Protect the rule of law and the fundamental rights of EU citizens, with a particular focus on threads to the freedom of the press and professional confidentiality (including lawyer-client relationships) as well as enhanced protection for whistleblowers".
Action 6: Develop a european strategy for IT independence (that'll send cold shivers down the spine of certain US companies).
Action 7: Develop the EU as a reference player for a democratic and neutral governance of the internet (my translation: currently it's a US party, we want in on that).
All your ghosts are just false positives.
The fear is that the US may be able to get Snowden's location by backtracing his connection, not what he may be saying.
The real tin-foil-hatters would say the US has injected a CG images into the stream to make him say different things. :-P
Hey, they have all the technology needed to do it, it's just a matter of whether they want to.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
There's these things called telephones. Check it out sometime.
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
...and that there may be other motives such as political and economic espionage
Jeez... Ya think? I'll spare us the rant about how much of that has already occurred and jump right to how ashamed I am that my country has embraced such activity on such a scale. I mean, I get that, in business "it's just business" is a tacit rationalization for doing anything that you can get away with to enhance the bottom line, but for my government, who is supposed to at least carry on the illusion that it represents my interests, to give that same excuse is just, well, shameful.
Aside from the fact that he'll be testifying remotely, the plane that they grounded that time was headed to somewhere in Latin America (Cuba or Ecuador I think). Do you really think the US would be allowed ground and search a plane anywhere in Europe that's chartered in and bound for an EU country?
aging and obsolete guns like the 1911 and the AR-15.
Whoa there! While I generally agree with much of the rest your post, them's fighting words! The M4 is still one of the most versatile and proven families of military rifles currently in use. It's come a long way since the old Vietnam-era M16's/AR-15's.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
I can just imagine how Putin would react if they caught a special forces team trying to nab him.
*makes popcorn*
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
the plane that they grounded that time was headed to somewhere in Latin America (Cuba or Ecuador I think).
That would be Bolivia. Which, since it was Bolivian President Evo Morales's plane, is about as serious a diplomatic violation as you can get (imagine Russia or China grounding Air Force One and searching it).
I am officially gone from
I also know, despite being a dumb amerikkkan, that none of those places are in Russia. Snowden will absolutely be captured if he appears in any of these places and would be a great fool to testify there.
I dunno, he might just use the phone, or a videoconference tool over the internet (not like he's discussing state secrets (well, not anymore really)). You might not be that dumb of an "amerikkkan", but you're not the most practical person in the US of A either. I'd urge you to become more practical before turning into an enemy of the state, should the thought ever cross your (or your governments) mind.
The former US National Security Agency worker would testify by interactive video link from Russia, where he has been granted temporary asylum.
Right there in the article even.
Anyway, we'll see what happens. The article mentions that people are divided about having him talk, keeping US-EU relations in mind, which by itself in my opinion speaks tales about "how concerned" these people really are by the whole ordeal. In the end it remains politics, and even if most people were terribly upset they'll still shake hands and sign agreements as if there isn't a care in the world. I can see the merit of asking Snowden a few questions or clarifications, but if I understand it correctly he's already released his documents he had to share. I also vaguely remember his terms for his asylum being "not to further embarrass our American partners", and I would be extremely cautious if I were him about what those terms exactly mean. Putin may enjoy his little prank on the US, but he doesn't like it when people don't dance to his tune.
I think that if you read between the lines of all of this, the EU isn't even all that concerned about its citizens, but rather about its political and economical agenda. I wouldn't be surprised at all if many countries in the EU currently have their intelligence services cooperatively lobbying their politicians to do the very same. Hell, I would be surprised if they already haven't done such a thing on a smaller scale in the first place, considering how much some of the EU nations are investing in their own "anti-terror" efforts, although much more low profile and with considerably less impact. In reality, all nations across the globe are engaged in political and economical espionage, but it's their efficiency that you should be concerned about.
I would say this is nothing but a lot of grandstanding for political reasons, but I am a cynic when it comes to politics. Many European politicians although they emit an air of indifference when it comes to the US, are very big fans of the US as has been made obvious by the cable leaks released by wikileaks in the past. There's decades of treaties and agreements between most EU nations and the US, and few are willing to risk the long-term benefits of those.
It's still cursed with the direct-impingement system of operation (except for the variants that replaced that with a gas piston, but those are not common or normal, and are usually high-priced), which makes it extremely vulnerable to malfunctions if it isn't kept meticulously clean. That's not a good trait for a battle rifle.
The H&K G36, SIG 550, FN F2000, Steyr and others are all far superior weapons.
I'm quite sure CIA knows exactly where Snowden is; they probably know the last time he took a shit, and from that even how much pork was in his last bowl of shchi. That said, there is absolutely zero possibility of the US touching him while he's in Russia.
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
It is highly unlikely that the EU will kick out the US military. Having the US military there strengthens their own defenses, but that's not the main reason. The main reason is economic. Having a US base there dumps a huge amount of money into the local economy. Kicking out the US military would be economically devastating the the areas surrounding the bases.
The EU and US are allies and competitors at the same time. EU government agencies rarely pass up a chance to tweak the US government. People on both sides talk about removing the bases from time to time, but it never happens because having those bases there benefits both the US and EU.
People from Germany, France, and other talk about how they would never put up with their governments spying. They don't trust their own governments, yet they expect the US government to trust their government? Blind trust of governments, your own or a foreign one is extremely foolish. People know that but they don't think through what that means.
As for the bulk data collection. I suspect that the administration will scrap the program and go back to requesting the data on individual cell phone numbers from the cell companies. However since our Supreme Court ruled decades ago that we don't have a reasonable expectation to privacy regarding such metadata held by third parties, it will have very little real effect. A warrant will still not be required to get the data from the cell companies. The pen register act requires a court order, but the standards for getting such an order are so low that the court is basically required to rubber stamp any request. It will take them more time to gather metadata and the process will be less efficient, but there will be no real increase in our privacy protections.
The document urges EU countries to take legal action against the breach of their sovereignty perpetrated through such mass surveillance programs.
What in the hell are they going to do? Tell the world-police on the... well, world-police?
I've been called troll for saying it in the past, but I'll try again here... If anything has come of "the Snowden release", it's only to inspire more hatred for the American government. This will always be taken out on the American people in the end. Assuming that 9/11 wasn't an inside job, and assuming that 9/11 was done by the people that were "charged" with doing so, could their reason have been hatred for "The People" of America, or "The Government" of America? And if that's the case, can we expect more of that same shit? Will it ever stop? Should American forever live in fear, based on the bullshit steps taken by it's "protective" government to stop such actions? It's so silly there aren't words to describe it without seeming like a troll.
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
You're a bit more confident than I am. They won't grab him, but they might assassinate him. If they're feeling snarky they could use Polonium.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Oh the irony...oh the humor in your post. 2nd Amenders getting all robust about how in America (my country) wez gotz the rights to carry gunz and shoot em (at furners if need be), but we don't make the guns?
Is it the EU plan to keep sending guns over to us in the hope we all just shoot each other then later on they can "help" us rebuild.
Haven't figure out if your post makes me laugh, cry, or just feel that the world is just a little fucked up.
Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
Don't misinterpret my post: America *does* make guns, and lots of them. There's still lots of gun makers in America: Mossberg, Remington, Smith & Wesson, Colt, Ruger, Springfield (except for their imported XD line), Kimber, and dozens if not hundreds more smaller companies. I'm just pointing out how many of the better weapons, including many used by police forces and the military, come from Europe, not gun-happy America.
A lot of America's gunmakers (including most of those unnamed smaller companies, and some of the ones I listed) are fairly low-volume, and make specialty guns for niche markets. Ruger, for instance, makes a lot of revolvers, including the very nice GP100 .357 Magnum. It's a nice self-defense gun, though a bit large and heavy, but it's not something that you'll see any police forces using. Kimber seems to make nothing but fancy 1911 clones. Again, I'm sure they're very well-made weapons that 1911 collectors will love, but the 1911 design is ancient and obsolete (102 years old now), and not something at all suitable as a modern sidearm for the police or military (they can't even be taken apart quickly and toollessly like a Glock or XD). There's lots of other companies also making 1911 clones. Mossberg and Remington make very reliable shotguns, though Italian-made Benellis look nicer and are preferred by police.
It's weird, but it's not a rule by any means. Canada has stronger gun-control laws too, but I don't know of any guns made there. Mexico has very strong gun-control laws, but I don't know of any guns made there either (and if they did, they'd probably suck; Mexico isn't exactly known for Swiss-level precision manufacturing). Japan has ultra-strict laws but they don't make guns either. China probably has very strong gun-control laws too, and while they do make guns, theirs generally suck (crappy AK-47 clones).
While you have a good point about the H&K, your point about personal protection is pretty important: US companies do indeed make a lot of guns for personal/individual buyers, but (the point I was trying to make) they largely fail at making guns for US police agencies and the US military. You'd think government agencies in the gun-happy US wouldn't feel the need to go to anti-gun Europe to get guns, but they do. How many police departments *don't* use Glocks as their standard service-issue handgun? US companies have had decades now to develop competing models, but they've mostly failed. And as for your H&K example, OK, their US subsidiary is apparently doing much of the design, but why is a German-owned company going to be a supplier for the US military at all? It's not like there's a shortage of US-based (entirely), US-owned gun-making companies to go to. But apparently, none of them are good enough for the US military, since they all have recycled versions of ancient designs. It's not just the zillions of AR-15 clones out there, some US gun companies are even making spruced-up versions of the truly ancient M1 Garand rifle from WWII. WTF? Obviously, US gun companies are good at making expensive, boutique guns with oiled black walnut stocks and pearl inlays and other such things, but for designing cutting-edge weaponry to be mass-produced for large military forces, they simply don't have the capability.
So, you mean we're like the China or Mexico of the gun industry? We can put a bunch of people to work in a factory building stuff because our labor's cheap, but we're not smart enough to do the engineering work? Yeah, that sounds like a big achievement.
just for the record: the Steyr Mannlicher GmbH & Co KG is an Austrian company with a 150-year history based in the city of Steyr in Upper Austria.
The 5.56mm Steyr AUG (Armee Universal Gewehr) has been designed for and adoped by the Austrian Austrian Army as the standard infantry rifle (StG77 - Sturmgewehr 77). In the US, you probably know the weapon from movies - it's the weapon of choice for bad guy Euro snobs and it occasionally can even be seen in SF movies due to its futuristic design.
ignatius
The unreliability of AR direct impingement is greatly overstated. This is not to say that it's not a factor, but it's not the first rifle to be built around that concept, but the only one to have acquired a negative reputation. In truth, most AR failures have to do with magazines by a long margin - run something decent (like a PMAG or Lancer or even 20-round USGI) and you'll see most of the difference between AR and HK416 disappear already. For example, the infamous dust storm test where M4 shows 4x failures than all other contestants? What people often forget is that, in that test, M4 was running with then-current USGI 30-rounders, and other rifles were running with custom mags from their corresponding manufacturers, with anti-tilt followers etc.
The other major problem with AR and clones is the design of the receiver - instead of having bolt ride on rails inside the receiver, as any sane system has done forever, the bolt rides directly against the walls of the receiver. What this means is that there's a lot more surface area on which friction happens, and hence a lot more chance that dirt and dust can gum up the action, especially if it spreads around. With an AK or similar, if you get some dirt on the rails, so what? the next bolt cycle will just push it off them. In an AR, there's nowhere for it to go, so it stays there and keeps interfering.
Furthermore, because you have more contact surface, you need more lubrication, too. But the catch with lube is that it captures any dust or sand that may be around and congeals it into blobs that are even more efficient at gumming up the action...
Note that this is a trait shared also by HK416 and other piston AR variations. Though direct impingement is particularly hindered by this design flaw, because of carbon fouling on receiver walls (incl. contact surfaces), but also because it raises the temperature to the point where lube is burned off. So you have to keep adding more and more to keep the rifle running...
The other related problem is that if you get a dent in any of those walls that directly contact the body of the bolt (which is easier to do with AK, it having an aluminum receiver), it's game over. It's much harder to do that with an AK, not just because its receiver is steel, but also because the surfaces in question are internal; and even if they are slightly bent, that won't actually affect it nearly as much, and is much easier to fix.
It's worse than that. The EU is where the US gets its guns from, because the US is too incompetent to make its own guns any more. Most police departments use Glocks, which come from Austria, and the US military is going to use an H-K rifle from Germany for their next-generation assault rifle. The US military already uses the Beretta M-9 for its standard sidearm: Beretta is an Italian company.
At least as far as all the military contracts go, the requirement is that the winner manufactures them in the USA. So M9, M249, M27 IAR, M4A1 etc are all made in US, even though the plants are owned by Beretta, FN etc.
For law enforcement and civilian firearms this is not always the case, but a lot of European companies still end up manufacturing those things in US. It's the biggest market, and it's cheaper to make it right here where they sell most of them than to export/import them across the Atlantic. FN does it for most of their guns - my FNX-9 says "made in USA", for example.
All the best guns come from the EU (or Switzerland, which is surrounded by the EU): FAL in Belgium with their P90 submachine gun and F2000 rifle (standard rifle used by many countries' armies including Pakistan), H-K in Germany with their MP5 submachine gun used by lots of militaries and police departments including probably every US SWAT team, Glock in Austria, SIG in Switzerland, HS in Croatia, Steyr in Britain, I'm sure there's lots more.
FAL is very much outdated, but if you were to compare it with the guns of its era, M14 was at least as good if not better (lighter, and by most accounts more reliable).
F2000 is not particularly good. Very bulky, and that forward ejection system of theirs is prone to having cases stuck in it, which is very hard to quickly clear (kinda important in combat). It doesn't have all that many users, either.
US gunmakers do make interesting new stuff - e.g. ARAK. However, it's mostly the small shops that do any innovation of notice, while the big guys, as you say, keep cranking out 1911 and AR clones.
Canada has stronger gun-control laws too, but I don't know of any guns made there.
They don't have any gun manufacturers headquartered there, but they do have factories. Colt Canada is one obvious case, but e.g. Savage also manufactures their rifles for sale in Canadian market directly in Canada. Possibly some others, I'm not sure.
Designed in Canada, now, I can't think of anything modern.
Mexico has very strong gun-control laws, but I don't know of any guns made there either
There has been a trend of outsourcing manufacture of guns for US market to Mexico lately, actually, at least for cheap guns. I can't recall the exact model names, but I've seen a few.
They are also making guns for their own army, and historically did so. In particular, FX-05, their standard issue assault rifle, is both designed and built locally. Before that, they were producing G3 under license.
Japan has ultra-strict laws but they don't make guns either.
They do, they just don't export them as much. Howa Type 89 is their standard issue rifle, locally designed and manufactured. They do produce and export some hunting and competition rifles, though.
China probably has very strong gun-control laws too, and while they do make guns, theirs generally suck (crappy AK-47 clones).
That's like 20 years out of date. QBZ-95 is hardly an AK clone at this point, for example.
The pinnacle of irony was when Colt lost the bid to manufacture M4A1 (which is kinda American design through and through) for the Army to FN.
Sorry, you're correct. I was thinking of some other bullpup rifle, whose name escapes me now, which is used by much of Britain's military. I think the Steyr is actually used in Australia, as well as Austria of course. (A quick look at the Wikipedia page for the AUG confirms it's used in Australia plus lots of other places.)
While looking at the Wiki page, I noticed another thing I'll use to bash the AR-15 so loved by Americans: it's not ambidextrous. The Steyr AUG is, as well as FAL's rifles, and probably many others. What kind of POS rifle can't be fired by left-handed users? Maybe that was acceptable in 1960, but these days there's just no excuse for that.
In US, we know Steyr AUG (in its civilian incarnation) as one of those things on the wall in your local gun shop that you really want to buy because it looks so nice (and you've heard good things about it), but cannot justify the $1.7k price sticker.
I do hope the prices drop down now that they've got some solid competition on form of Tavor, though.
At least as far as all the military contracts go, the requirement is that the winner manufactures them in the USA. So M9, M249, M27 IAR, M4A1 etc are all made in US, even though the plants are owned by Beretta, FN etc.
Yes of course; the Chinese do something very similar, forcing companies to progressively move all production and know-how to China until they no longer need the vendor company at all. The US obviously doesn't quite go that far, since they never design their own guns or shed the foreign vendor company in favor of domestic companies.
FAL is very much outdated
Sorry, another error of mine: I meant "FN", the company itself, not a specific gun. FN makes the P90 and F2000 (if I'm getting my model numbers right), both very modern weapons.
That's like 20 years out of date. QBZ-95 is hardly an AK clone at this point, for example.
Wow, that QBZ-95 is very impressive-looking from the Wikipedia article. Looks much more advanced than the US military's standard rifles: bullpup design, 4-position selector (so you get both full-auto and 3-round-burst) and it looks like they put a lot of thought into making it more controllable during full-auto fire. Too bad we can't be as innovative as the Chinese....
Always keep in mind that the arrival of the future won't stop anytime soon, and it almost always has surprises in store. You may want friends around to help meet some of those surprises.
At the same time, when someone claims to be a friend, and then it turns out that they weren't anywhere nearly so friendly as they claimed to be, you may want to dump them and find better friends. Or, if no such friends are to be found, to increase your self-reliance. Better that then find that the "friend" is not actually a friend in need when that need comes.
What's funny is that they actually make a civilian version of it (it even made it to Canada at some point). But, of course, we can't have it in US because of the Norinco import ban.
Note that it uses their own domestically designed and manufactured ammo, too. Not much info about that, unfortunately - all export models are chambered in whatever's popular in the corresponding market (usually 5.56), so there are no ballistic tests and such, and no way to validate their claims that it outperforms both 5.56 and 5.45. I can believe that when it comes to M193 and M855, but it would be interesting to see how it stacks up against something like Mk262.
Yep, that seems pretty shameful really.
Did you have any particular nations and situations in mind? Or is this all classroom note passing?
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
I don't know - did you have any particular nations in mind with your original post to which I replied? That part of it:
You may want friends around to help meet some of those surprises.
I did. I would think it wouldn't be difficult to discern from the context of the paragraph. But it is helpful to know what your comments were apparently random.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
At least as far as all the military contracts go, the requirement is that the winner manufactures them in the USA. So M9, M249, M27 IAR, M4A1 etc are all made in US, even though the plants are owned by Beretta, FN etc.
For law enforcement and civilian firearms this is not always the case,
Exactly. Which is why, btw. the Glock Pistols are used by the US-Police but not by the Army (afaik), as Gaston Glock flat out refused to have his guns produced under licence.
ignatius
That's only because job creation is one of the best arguments arms manufacturers have when placing bids with government etc. so sticking whatever bottom of the rung jobs you can in the bid country whilst keeping the highly paid jobs of design and testing back home and also returning the profits back home is not uncommon practice.
Even if you're doing the physical manufacturing work, you're still not retaining the design and engineering talent, and you're still not getting the lion's share of the financial benefits which are both what really matter for a developed economy because if nothing else, the manufacturing could be shipped off to India or China on a whim as they can outcompete you on cost, but the engineering skills much less so.
And interesting detail ist that Steyr was also supposed to get the contract for the new Autrian Army Pistol, however - after extensive tests and much to everybodys surprise - the contract finally got to a new contender with no prior experience in the design of handguns: Gaston Glock, who developed a new pistol from ground up: the Glock 17. It was the first handgun from Glock and became the P80 (which is the military designation) - the rest is history.
ignatius
The British rifle you're thinking of is the SA80, otherwise designated as the L85 with a long barrelled LSW version the L86.
Unfortunately the SA80 isn't ambidextrous either and it had a lot of earlier problems jamming in sandy environments (as discovered in the first gulf war).
Nowadays it's a pretty nice weapon, but it's only got about another 10 years of service left in it currently anyway.
Snowden's leaks also revealed information about EU member states. It's already clear the UK is not happy about that.