What has more to do with this discussion?
The most fundamental question when planning to acquire new equipment is why do you need it. Evaluating the future military threats is the very starting point.
Fighters are not just toys for the pilots. They are to protect us.
The German Government has already established this, we don’t need to debate it because they will replace the Tornado fleet with another aircraft. The question isn’t why, the question is which. To take it a step further Germany has already agreed to develop a stealth aircraft. They are fully aware of the future military threat and what is required.
What was false?
Again, stand by your points or don’t bother posting them at all.
When, where and why should German Tornados or whatever else have gone into Russia?
The most useful weapon is the one that is never used!^n
Yimby, you can’t stay on topic, if you make a claim then support it. What point is there to responding if you keep changing the direction and never answering anything?
How many of the above questions you then answered? If my math is correct, that is about 0.
What is wrong focusing to the core of the topic?
For sure the most important question is why. That is the starting point. There is no which without why. If you do not want to have a discussion about why, you could call the moderator to close the thread or the whole forum. I recognize that it is a very political issue, but some politics is unavoidable in the military forum, and let the moderators tell where is the limit. Even if the why is fixed by the German government, we can speculate what it is, as the government may not tell everything.
In real life, however, the why is not a stable issue. The technology develops, in the USA, in Europe, in Russia and in the Middle East. There will be new scientific discoveries. The political landscape changes. Yesterday's friend can be tomorrow's foe or vice versa. Therefore the decision makers should continuously ask why, what for do they need defense capacity, how much and which are the best ways to build the necessary capacity. It is never correct to say that the previous capacity should be replaced 1:1 as it is very unlikely that the previous decision makers had accurate idea on today's world.
I know very well that the military prefer premature closing and want to run controlled projects in controlled environments. That is where all those standardized project management protocols come from. Agile just does not match with military. Maybe good so?