This can be seen as another attempt by Poland to clinch significant military-security deals, including a permanent US base and possibly hosting nukes, for convincing Trump 2.0 to support it over Germany.
All these discussions and efforts in order to produce the PATRIOT system on European Continent seem quite bizarre for me : according to former MIT professor Ted Postol such system only has extremely limited efficiency on ballistic missiles (5%), and none on hypersonic ones. Patriot would be efficient on cruise missiles and drones.
The system is several decades old and was not even efficient against SCUD missiles during iraki war
And each system costs $1 billion, each shell 4 million.
All these discussions appear ridiculous, and would only show the level of mental trouble within European leaders.
Anyway who would think the Chinese would provide necessary rare earths ?
Who would think such production would exist before 5 years or so, due to system supply chain complexity?
I have no satisfactory explanation regarding military domain, apart from NATO consistency.
High investment and maintenance cost, low availibility, questionable stealth qualities, US kill switch…
Fashion effect ? Will to demonstrate vassal posture or give the US as much money as possible ?
And now no possibility to deliver them before ages due to US rare earths shortfalls. Already latest deliveries to marines corps took place without nose radar!
If there are better options within the EU, then Poland could have just bought from within the EU. But Poland proposed this as a bribe to the US (by paying a heavy licensing fee, etc).
Patriot may Indeed be effective on heavy drones and subsonic missiles; not sure there is any improved précision of ballistic ones; rather, Russia took the risk of launching them on Kiev city centre because they decided to accelerate the SMO whikexaccepting more collatéral risk- which did not matérialisé due to intrinsic précision.
If this wasn't so serious, it would be laughable. The main point of my criticism is that the Patriot, the bulwark of western defences against missiles, does not, apparently work as advertised. Indeed, the interception success rate appears to be less than 10%!
But we can speak about the F35 too. 700 billions dollars thrown to trash can.
And Zumwalt frégate too.
And Ford class carrier.
It seems that USA don't build weapons to be efficient, effective and tough but for filling some pockets.
It can't be otherwise in a system where companies can openly buy politiciens and were the generals who choose and buy weapons end their career in very lucrative job in war industry.
"It’s accordingly up to the US whether to support the scenario of a German-dominated EU as its preferred bulwark for containing Russia in Western Eurasia..." I think the word "containing" here, and in many other places misrepresents the actual meaning and intention. The US doesn't want to "contain" Russia or China but to do what is trying to do now in Iran, replace the system and leadership with something pliable to US as well as open to US extraction. That is not "containment". A correction of words is overdue.
Poland has been an emieof Ukraine for centuries. What else woud ome expect from Polans. Ukrain has ONE good opyion . Join up with Russia and becme the biggest , richest country in the woprld.
Ukraine has been in existence only since 1991. As a term "Ukrainian" started to gain traction only a bit prior to WWI, a construct of Austrian PR to weaken the Russian empire. Nobdy called themselves Ukrainians. The "Ukrainian" immigration to Canada at the end of 19 century and beginning of 20th only mentions Rutens and Rusyns, not Ukrainians and one can even find nowadays such associations. Of course, the influx after WWII of ethno-nationalists in Canada for instance meant that all these associations, many having certain institutional support, were taken over by hard-core "ukrainian" ethno-nationalists.
Poland has wrestled with Russia for centuries for the control of the space and population located between the core of their respective powers and territory. Sometimes the borderland population allied with the Poles, and sometimes not, but since at least 1650 those people aligned themselves mostly with the Russian Czars... Now they want to be independent, pure, and if possible to enlarge their territory and assimilate or eliminate anyone not madly in love with Ukraine within their borders.
All these discussions and efforts in order to produce the PATRIOT system on European Continent seem quite bizarre for me : according to former MIT professor Ted Postol such system only has extremely limited efficiency on ballistic missiles (5%), and none on hypersonic ones. Patriot would be efficient on cruise missiles and drones.
The system is several decades old and was not even efficient against SCUD missiles during iraki war
And each system costs $1 billion, each shell 4 million.
All these discussions appear ridiculous, and would only show the level of mental trouble within European leaders.
Anyway who would think the Chinese would provide necessary rare earths ?
Who would think such production would exist before 5 years or so, due to system supply chain complexity?
Yes. And please, explain me why countries buy the flying iron F35?
I have no satisfactory explanation regarding military domain, apart from NATO consistency.
High investment and maintenance cost, low availibility, questionable stealth qualities, US kill switch…
Fashion effect ? Will to demonstrate vassal posture or give the US as much money as possible ?
And now no possibility to deliver them before ages due to US rare earths shortfalls. Already latest deliveries to marines corps took place without nose radar!
If there are better options within the EU, then Poland could have just bought from within the EU. But Poland proposed this as a bribe to the US (by paying a heavy licensing fee, etc).
I've heard the theory. But I notice that Russian drone and missile strikes in Ukraine have gotten more effective when Patriot supplies are low.
Patriot may Indeed be effective on heavy drones and subsonic missiles; not sure there is any improved précision of ballistic ones; rather, Russia took the risk of launching them on Kiev city centre because they decided to accelerate the SMO whikexaccepting more collatéral risk- which did not matérialisé due to intrinsic précision.
If this wasn't so serious, it would be laughable. The main point of my criticism is that the Patriot, the bulwark of western defences against missiles, does not, apparently work as advertised. Indeed, the interception success rate appears to be less than 10%!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Postol
So, taxpayers' money is being spent on something that "doesn't do what it says on the tin," in order to...... What, precisely?
Absolutely true.
But we can speak about the F35 too. 700 billions dollars thrown to trash can.
And Zumwalt frégate too.
And Ford class carrier.
It seems that USA don't build weapons to be efficient, effective and tough but for filling some pockets.
It can't be otherwise in a system where companies can openly buy politiciens and were the generals who choose and buy weapons end their career in very lucrative job in war industry.
A reasonably smart move for Poland, but it cuts Zelensky's profit margin.
"It’s accordingly up to the US whether to support the scenario of a German-dominated EU as its preferred bulwark for containing Russia in Western Eurasia..." I think the word "containing" here, and in many other places misrepresents the actual meaning and intention. The US doesn't want to "contain" Russia or China but to do what is trying to do now in Iran, replace the system and leadership with something pliable to US as well as open to US extraction. That is not "containment". A correction of words is overdue.
Ukraine is not going to produce anything other than warm live bodies, no matter what the headlines say.
Far easier and cheaper to produce Patriots in the EU, where Russia dare not strike.
Poland has been an emieof Ukraine for centuries. What else woud ome expect from Polans. Ukrain has ONE good opyion . Join up with Russia and becme the biggest , richest country in the woprld.
Ukraine has been in existence only since 1991. As a term "Ukrainian" started to gain traction only a bit prior to WWI, a construct of Austrian PR to weaken the Russian empire. Nobdy called themselves Ukrainians. The "Ukrainian" immigration to Canada at the end of 19 century and beginning of 20th only mentions Rutens and Rusyns, not Ukrainians and one can even find nowadays such associations. Of course, the influx after WWII of ethno-nationalists in Canada for instance meant that all these associations, many having certain institutional support, were taken over by hard-core "ukrainian" ethno-nationalists.
Poland has wrestled with Russia for centuries for the control of the space and population located between the core of their respective powers and territory. Sometimes the borderland population allied with the Poles, and sometimes not, but since at least 1650 those people aligned themselves mostly with the Russian Czars... Now they want to be independent, pure, and if possible to enlarge their territory and assimilate or eliminate anyone not madly in love with Ukraine within their borders.