Sorry Branko, the Patriots probably did not know they were hypersonic when they took them down. You must send an email to the Pentagon and write a poem telling them they cannot take them down.
The combat abilities of the Patriot are greatly exaggerated. Patriot's only accomplishments in the US Army were two friendly fire incidents in Iraq in 2003, when Patriot shot down one British and one American aircraft. Later, Israel shot down a couple more planes from the Patriot in Syria, and this is where all the combat achievements of the Patriot in the entire history of its existence actually end. The United States has never had good mobile air defense systems, because for the United States this is not a priority.
...
...
If you are referring to Peskov's recent statement, then I think it is mainly aimed at preparing the Russian society for the speedy completion of the special operation in Ukraine. And yes, in the issue of demilitarization, Russia has achieved very significant success, and not only in the demilitarization of Ukraine, but of the whole of Europe. Stoltenberg said today that NATO arsenals are empty because of military aid to Ukraine.
US tends to actually do the opposite: typically the declared capabilities of most of their equipment are lower than they actually are. Also there is a great echo chamber for anything that may make the US army look too expensive, prone to mistakes and mismanagement of money. All of those have some truth, but mostly are similar to the "abilities" of the RF, Japan and even Germany.
Practice is the criterion of truth. And from the point of view of real practical success, the Patriot air defense system is the weakest in its class. Ukrainians need to understand this so that there are no unnecessary disappointments from inflated expectations regarding the level of protection of Kyiv from air threats.
Stoltenberg wants the world to become militarised and that happens when the budget reaches more than 2%. That is his goal, and that is the why of his words.
It's good that you understand what Stoltenberg wants and what NATO wants.
It is possible that RF wants to "close" the operation, that does not mean it will finish. As the saying goes, you know how a war starts, but you do not know when and how it ends.
I don't think that Russia wants to "close" the operation, and even if it does, it cannot be done unilaterally. In such cases, one has to take into account the opinions of all interested parties, and Ukraine and the collective West that supports it apparently continue to want the conflict to continue and "consistently go up the escalation ladder."