Edwards: US Tanks built overseas?

[Gryphon]

In a speech today where Democratic candidate John Edwards urged Americans to give up their SUV's, the candidate known on the web as "The Breck Girl" said that the United States was purchasing tanks from overseas.

Last I heard the Abrams was built by GDLS in Ohio, or have they farmed production out to Korea without telling me?

Here's the snip:

Edwards was clearly popular with the group, several times drawing standing ovations, including once when he said weapons and equipment used by America's military needs to be made in the United States. He said now tanks <my emphasis> and ammunition for M16 rifles are being made in other countries.

 

[eckherl]

In a speech today where Democratic candidate John Edwards urged Americans to give up their SUV's, the candidate known on the web as "The Breck Girl" said that the United States was purchasing tanks from overseas.

Last I heard the Abrams was built by GDLS in Ohio, or have they farmed production out to Korea without telling me?

Here's the snip:

Edwards was clearly popular with the group, several times drawing standing ovations, including once when he said weapons and equipment used by America's military needs to be made in the United States. He said now tanks <my emphasis> and ammunition for M16 rifles are being made in other countries.

Some of the ammunition that we use does come from South Korea, I believe the company is called PMC. As for the U.S having tanks built over seas is a false statement, but some of the components are design technology from other countries. He most likely just made a honest mistake.

 

[radiosilence]

As of 2003, The Lima tank plant in Ohio was the only maker of the M1A1 and M1A2.

 

[eckherl]

As of 2003, The Lima tank plant in Ohio was the only maker of the M1A1 and M1A2.

Correct - the only country that even comes close to building M1A1s is Egypt, and they basically recieve kits from the U.S and build them over there. They have recently requested an additional 125 tanks from us with some of the upgrades installed on the M1A2s.

 

[Waylander]

Are the Strykers solely build in the US?
Politicians and press tend to name everything a tank which is armored and is operated by the military...

 

[Todjaeger]

It is correct that the US has ordered small arms ammunition from Israel and South Korea. Principally it was for 7.62mm and 0.50 cal rounds, since the US rate of production (at least in 2004) wasn't able to keep pace with the demand and there were comparatively low reserve stocks.

There's a link to this issue here

As for the Stryker, the work is split 60/40 between Sterling Heights, MI USA and London, Ontario CA. I've included a link about a recent order for a further 165 Stryker vehicles here.

-Cheers

 

[Marsh]

It's not technically accurate, but as it was part of a speech I expect he felt safe enough in the claim as certain US army vehicles have come from overseas and he could always assert that was what he meant.

Most politicians' statements take small truths and and use them to highlight vaguely-connected issues. There's a technical term for this kind of rhetorical device but I forget offhand what it is.

Eckherl, are Egypt the only assemblers of M1s? I thought perhaps Saudi Arabia also followed this practice?

 

[Gryphon]

The Stryker is also a GDLS product, from Michigan.

Some of our original MRAPS were South African RG-31's, but those were very small orders compared to the units from Force Protection (South Carolina) and Intenational (Michigan).

 

[eckherl]

It's not technically accurate, but as it was part of a speech I expect he felt safe enough in the claim as certain US army vehicles have come from overseas and he could always assert that was what he meant.

Most politicians' statements take small truths and and use them to highlight vaguely-connected issues. There's a technical term for this kind of rhetorical device but I forget offhand what it is.

Eckherl, are Egypt the only assemblers of M1s? I thought perhaps Saudi Arabia also followed this practice?

I believe all of Saudi Arabia`s M1A2`s have come directly from U.S manufacturing facilities.

 

[radiosilence]

I read some time ago there was a plan to build a Abrams tank factory in Egypt that would supply Arab nations. The plan was scraped because Egypt was not capable of manufacturing the tank which is why finished components are sent as kits to be assemble in Egypt.

 

[SaudiArabian]

Egypt does manufacture 40% of the M1A1 and assembles it with the rest parts that comes from the US

I believe all of Saudi Arabia`s M1A2`s have come directly from U.S manufacturing facilities.

the RSLF M1A2's electronics and radio systems were made in the Kingdom by AEC , the rest came directly from the US

 

[Waylander]

I also remember that the US bought some Fox NBC-tanks from germany some time ago but that was a very tiny number.

So which parts of the Abrams are produced in Egypt and which are produced in the US?
I would think that at least the armor and gun is produced in the US with the electronics being produced in Egypt.

 

[eckherl]

Egypt does manufacture 40% of the M1A1 and assembles it with the rest parts that comes from the US

Yes but not the structure and armor package.


the RSLF M1A2's electronics and radio systems were made in the Kingdom by AEC , the rest came directly from the US

Thanks for confirming this.

 

[eckherl]

I also remember that the US bought some Fox NBC-tanks from germany some time ago but that was a very tiny number.

So which parts of the Abrams are produced in Egypt and which are produced in the US?
I would think that at least the armor and gun is produced in the US with the electronics being produced in Egypt.

That is correct, it is our electronics package but they manufacture some of it under license.

The Fox was a darn good NBC recon vehicle, even the UK uses it. Didn`t the U.S lease some of these vehicles also from Germany.

 

[Waylander]

I think they bought the vehicles and didn't lease them.

Some of our own NBC troops with their Foxs were stationed in Kuwait before and during OIF.

 

[eckherl]

I think they bought the vehicles and didn't lease them.

Some of our own NBC troops with their Foxs were stationed in Kuwait before and during OIF.

That is most likely why I thought that we may of leased them. Does Germany still use it as a primary NBC vehicle.

 

[kato]

Does Germany still use it as a primary NBC vehicle.

Yep. Still the same, though the number of NBC battalions (and therefore Foxes) has gone down significantly since the Cold War. I like em personally, as APCs they're damn roomy for just the four NBC Recon crew members (seriously, even a truck-mounted Comms shelter is no comparison, space-wise).


Waylander:

Afaik, the USA bought 12 for trials in '88 and '89. In 1990, Germany then "donated" 60 to the US Army (from BW stocks), and the rest (another 60?) were bought.

It's a bit difficult to find exact sources on this, but that's usually the case with weapon deals in Kohl's times :shudder

 

[metro]

It's not technically accurate, but as it was part of a speech I expect he felt safe enough in the claim as certain US army vehicles have come from overseas and he could always assert that was what he meant.

Most politicians' statements take small truths and and use them to highlight vaguely-connected issues. There's a technical term for this kind of rhetorical device but I forget offhand what it is.

Yep. It's strange to see how many Lawyers, who know all about "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth," go into Politics... if a courtroom--under oath--isn't a free enough place to play with the truth, than the world of Politics is a sanctuary.

I don't have Edwards whole speech, only what was posted.

he said weapons and equipment used by America's military needs to be made in the United States. He said now tanks <my emphasis> and ammunition for M16 rifles are being made in other countries.

-"Half-truths," pretty much covers what is done here.

First, read the two sentences together.
Then read them independently.

1+2 =An Implication. This is what he wants people to believe.
1) Is a opinion/statement.
2) Is a statement that is not completely false.

i.e. Tanks are in fact manufactured all over the world. The US is not the only tank producer on the planet.

IIRC, M16 ammo is in fact made in some other countries. There are other countries which also use M16s made in the USA. But they may use licensed/different/smaller caliber and/or less expensive rounds which, aren't made in the USA. AFAIK, the US only uses M16 ammo made in the US unless we are running short and need and ammo immediately (condition of circumstance), until US can resupply.

The entire Edwards' statement is designed to imply mainly one thing. However, he didn't say anything that is patently false (at least not in the statement here).
Deception? The statement in its totality is deceiving, but is there anything there to prove he was intentionally acting to deceive? Not so much.

Sorry, statement content analysis (AKA. "SCAN" and several other variations of names these days) is an area that I got into when I was young and I've been hooked ever since. Hey, it's very much related to DefenseTalk as every country I can think of has highly trained people who utilize "the science" in matters of "defense" (Military & otherwise).

BTW, one can go much further with Edwards' statement. For example, when I said, "Designed to imply mainly one thing" there are several other implications or questions that one can ask. From his first sentence, does Edwards think that no technology from allies should be shared/sold/bought by the USA (Isolationist)? If a US ally produces "equipment" that is superior to something made in the USA, or if there are foreign subsystems which can be added to our equipment to help our troops, should we say, "sorry guys, it's not made in the USA"?
The implication of the antithesis is, nothing used by "Other Militaries" should have equipment made in the USA?!?

I'll stop here, but one can go a lot further in depth and ask questions regarding Edwards commitment to anything having to do with our military or that of our allies (from this statement)!?::shudder

 

[Systems Adict]

BTW, one can go much further with Edwards' statement. For example, when I said, "Designed to imply mainly one thing" there are several other implications or questions that one can ask. From his first sentence, does Edwards think that no technology from allies should be shared/sold/bought by the USA (Isolationist)? If a US ally produces "equipment" that is superior to something made in the USA, or if there are foreign subsystems which can be added to our equipment to help our troops, should we say, "sorry guys, it's not made in the USA"?
The implication of the antithesis is, nothing used by "Other Militaries" should have equipment made in the USA?!?

Hate to say this, but if that's the way he wants, I think half of the material / weapons related equipment that's manufactured in the US, for the US is actually manufactured & owned by non-US companies, e.g. Thales, Rolls-Royce & BAE Systems to name but a few.

It's all well & good for the politicos to make nationalistic statements, but the US would NOT be the global power it is, if it hadn't learned from any early stage that if your trying to build a special piece of equipment & 1 of your allies has already perfected it, why waste the time, money & effort, when you can "buy" the design & manufacture it under license.

While I realise that there are CERTAIN things that have to be manufactured "in-house" (esp. secret comms kit / nuclear weapons), sharing a common platform with an ally is a good thing.

After all, how would the USMC get on if in the 60's & 70's the Brits had told them to "get lost" when we developed the Harrier Jump jet, or Rolls-Royce decided not sell any of their engines / engine technology ??

The U.S. KNOWS that it needs global support, to be a global leader / player, otherwise, maybe the Japs & Hitler would have won that little skirmish in the 1940's...


Systems Adict

 

[Gryphon]

Perhaps Tank-ers

I certainly will not defend Mr. Edward's (aka Breck Girl's) motives, but after sifting though volumes of our proposed defense procurements I think I may have found what he was intending to blast. Perhaps the possible procurement of replacements for the KC-135, tank-ers, the deal where Boeing got caught with their hand in the cookie jar and just might be awarded to the "Northrop's" Airbus A330.

It would be a slip worthy of an episode of West Wing, but plausible.