Posted on 03/08/2005 6:21:56 AM PST by nextthunder
BAE Systems to acquire United Defense
BAE Systems, Britain's biggest defense contractor, said yesterday that it is acquiring United Defense Industries Inc., an Arlington-based builder of combat vehicles, artillery and naval guns.
The $4 billion deal secures BAE's place as the Pentagon's leading foreign defense contractor and marks one of the largest acquisitions of a U.S. defense firm by a foreign company.
BAE Systems North America, BAE's Rockville-based subsidiary, will formally make the acquisition. The company designs, manufactures and maintains military aircraft, submarines, surface ships and their systems. United Defense, in business since World War II, makes combat vehicles such as the Bradley fighting vehicle, amphibious assault vehicles and naval weapons.
The purchase gives BAE greater access to Pentagon contracts, the most lucrative source of income in the world for weapons makers. "The reason BAE is doing it, this is the largest defense market in the world, and has continued to grow in recent years,"
said Phil Finnegan, director of corporate analysis at the Teal Group, an aerospace and defense consulting firm based in Fairfax. BAE has been building its stake in the U.S. market through a series of acquisitions, including five last year. The largest was of McLean-based DigitalNet in October for $600 million. BAE will pay $75 per share in cash for United Defense for a total of $3.97 million and assume $218 million in United Defense debt, BAE said.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Why do we have non-American companies in our defense?
Do you believe the sale of a U.S. defense contractor to a foreign company compromises U.S. national security?
Yes 94% 3598 votes
No 6% 219 votes
There are more Communist/Socialist/traitors in the British government than in our own. This gives them access to lots of our sophisticated technology.
you do realize that in reality this aquisition helps create an inter-operability between US-British militaries as well as increasing the amount the British use US manufactored weaponry even though it might be made by a
"British" subsidiary in US thus escaping the wrath of EU contractors of other countries who would complain by EU selling contracts to US instead it sells em to itself in a subsidiary in Arlington, Va a win-win in my view.
DirtyDoc
I also have a family member who works for BAE (actually a US company that merged with them) and I haven't heard anything negative about them either.
Thanks. Glad to hear it.
However, we have so many leakers in so many companies and government agencies, lots of Chinese and Indians there, that Russia and China have our stuff as fast as we do.
"The purchase gives BAE greater access to Pentagon contracts"
and the Chinese access to the workings of US weapons systems.(i.e thru the weapons ban lift by EU)
We deal with BAE quite a bit where I work. They have a number of US based divisions, which are the divisions we work with most commonly.
Those divisions are based in the US. They hire American employees. The usually work on American defense projects.
The company I work for is a US based company. However we do have a diviaion in England, and we have a sizable division in Canada.
We follow appropriate export regulations when selling products outside the US. We follow appropriate laws on disclosing information, and it's usually the various non-disclosure agreements that are the most restrictive issue when exchanging information.
If the EU lifts the ban on selling weapons to China, then I expect that our government will place some serious limitations on what technology can be exported to the EU.
It's really a losing proposition for the EU, but they're playing political games trying to show their independence.
It makes about as much sense as Canada withdrawl from the balistic missle defense.
However, we're the ones with a viable military, they aren't, so such actions hurt them far worse than they hurt us.
United Defense took a big hit when the Crusader project was cancelled. I'm not surprised to hear that they were purchased.
do you do realize that this one world Socialist military
The European Union and Russia joined forces over Iran, denying that a Moscow deal to help Tehran power up its first nuclear reactor will undermine EU-led diplomatic pressure on the Islamic state.
The EU, ignoring US protests, said it had no problems with the weekend deal for the Russian-built power plant at Bushehr in southern Iran, a project the United States alleges is part of a cover for weapons development.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, speaking after talks with EU leaders, meanwhile urged Americans to take a "more active" role in Europe-led diplomatic efforts with Iran.
"I'm sure the US share the same objectives and we would welcome more active US involvement in bringing these things," he said.
The Russia-Iran nuclear deal led to immediate US criticism, with two top senators calling for a tougher stance against Russia -- including a demand by influential Republican John McCain for Russia to be thrown out of the G8.
Washington and its European allies should tell Russia's President Vladimir Putin (news - web sites), "'Vladimir, you're not welcome at the next G8 conference' -- at least to start with," McCain told Fox News.
Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn, whose country currently holds the EU's rotating presidency, said both he and Lavrov agreed that Iran must stick to its commitments under UN nuclear accords.
"IAEA safeguards and NPT have to be respected," he said, referring to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) -- the UN's nuclear watchdog -- and the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty.
EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana underlined that all sides shared a common objective over Iran. "We don't want to see more weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East," he told a joint press conference with Lavrov.
But asked about the accord signed Sunday between Russia and Iran for the Bushehr plant, Asselborn said it had "no negative influence."
The comments echoed remarks by the European Commission (news - web sites), the EU's executive arm. "Our understanding is that the ... deal between Russia and Iran is compatible with our own approach," said spokeswoman Emma Udwin.
Three European Union (EU) countries -- Britain, France and Germany -- are leading negotiations designed to persuade Iran to permanently stop uranium enrichment activities.
Under Sunday's deal, which would cap an 800-million-dollar contract to bring the Bushehr plant on line, Russia will fuel the reactor on condition that Iran sends back spent fuel, which could potentially be upgraded to weapons use.
The EU spokeswoman denied there was any link between the Russia-Iran deal and the EU negotiations with Tehran.
"We are continuing these discussions. I don't see any direct link. The European negotiators are pursuing these discussions and we still hope that we will reach a positive agreement," she said.
Udwin, while saying the EU had not been informed in advance about the deal, stressed that both Iran and Russia "have made it clear that they will fully respect international rules and regulations on non proliferation.
"And most importantly (they have made it clear) that Bushehr will operated under the close supervision of the IAEA, added Udwin, spokeswoman for EU external relations commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner.
The EU spokeswoman reiterated that Europe believes very firmly that Iran should not develop a military nuclear capability. But she said: "We as the EU have never contested Iran's right to develop civilian nuclear power."
These representatives are responsible for trying to make our military subject to U.N. International laws. And John Warner is the worse of them all. If you don't agree with the international system that he made up then, you don't get no promotion. It's been completely disrupted thanks to the traders.
REPUBLICANS
John Warner (Virginia)
Chairman
John McCain (Arizona)
James M. Inhofe (Oklahoma)
Pat Roberts (Kansas)
Jeff Sessions (Alabama)
Susan M. Collins (Maine)
John Ensign (Nevada)
James M. Talent (Missouri)
Saxby Chambliss (Georgia)
Lindsey O. Graham (South Carolina)
Elizabeth Dole (North Carolina)
John Cornyn (Texas)
John Thune (South Dakota)
DEMOCRATS
Carl Levin (Michigan)
Ranking Member
Edward M. Kennedy (Massachusetts)
Robert C. Byrd (West Virginia)
Joseph I. Lieberman (Connecticut)
Jack Reed (Rhode Island)
Daniel K. Akaka (Hawaii)
Bill Nelson (Florida)
E. Benjamin Nelson (Nebraska)
Mark Dayton (Minnesota)
Evan Bayh (Indiana)
Hillary Rodham Clinton (New York)
Because we don't make stuff here any more, we out source the R&D/design work and we import the finish/manurfactured product.
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b2aa8747413.htm A CHRONOLOGICAL HISTORY OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER
Probably for the very same reason that no shortage of US defense firms are knee-deep in procurement for military weapons/programs in many other nations worldwide (such as S. Korea, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Thailand, you name it). Land, Sea, Air and Space.
Thanks for the link but I am too stupid to believe all that. Not that I disbelieve the facts as presented, I just don't arrive at the same conclusion. Some may control the money, and I am not convinced of that, but as long as free enterprise is the best method to employ that money, and it is, the vagaries of human nature work against control. If the money controllers are not going to maximize its use, why have it. Socialism has proven such a dead-end street, because of the vagaries of human nature, that its implementation is self-defeating. However, it is good history.
Free enterprise works against political control and it is the only successful politco-econo system so far. That is because of the very nature of us humans.
BAE systems has made it clear that it won't bid to supply weapon systems to the PRC if the EU lifts it's armsban in order to keep it's (sizable) commitment to the US market.
Believe it or not, I have heard BAE is a good company. Compare that to companies that are sending and selling our technology to China.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.