Hrm. Maybe those white elephant Polish airports ARE for eventual military use.

I don’t know how snarky Glenn Reynolds was being about this report

The European Union has given Poland more than 100 million euros ($125 million) to build at least three “ghost” airports in places where there are not enough passengers to keep them in business.

The result is gleaming new airport terminals which, even at the peak of the holiday season, echo to the sound of empty concourses and spend millions trying to attract airlines.

…when he suggested that they’d make good impromptu airstrips in case of a military invasion by the Soviets.  Err, sorry: ‘Russians.’  Old Cold Warrior reflex.  Anyway, and not to be all Cold War spy-nostalgic or anything, but if you look at a map to see where the airports (Reuters reports them as being  Lodz, Rzeszow and Lublin) that were renovated are:


I don’t know, folks.  The first two is where I’d put a couple of military strips in a hurry if I thought that my next door neighbors were about to be invaded by the same country that’s been invading mine for centuries. And the third looks like a reasonable place to put an airstrip if I thought that my capital might get invaded.  Again.

The problem here, of course, is that I live in a country that hasn’t been seriously invaded since the War of 1812 and hasn’t fought a war on its own soil since 1865*.  Which, ironically, can mean that maybe I’m overcompensating for that bit of self-awareness. So I dunno.  Maybe it’s a coincidence.  Although God knows Poland is probably happier knowing that there are countries between them and Russia. I certainly am.

Moe Lane

PS: To be clear, they’re not actually military airports. They’re civilian ones that are surprisingly under-used for their capacity, given that everybody agrees that there was no corruption involved.

*I also only have an amateur and a civilian knowledge of military affairs, but since when has that ever stopped anybody from pontificating?

2 thoughts on “Hrm. Maybe those white elephant Polish airports ARE for eventual military use.”

  1. Amateur and/or civilian knowledge of military affairs is all that is really necessary for most applications and comparisons like this. Anyone who comes along to snark about Pancho Villa, the Aleutian campaign, or the “War on Drugs/Poverty/etc.” is a nit picking pedant of the worst sort.

  2. Having the ability to receive military aid is one thing. A source for the military aid is another, as is the will to provide it. The European members of NATO are barely capable of getting out of their own way militarily, and their political leadership makes a decision to oppose Russia highly unlikely. The US is reducing its power projection capabilities as fast as it can, and our National Command Authority is not likely to say boo to Russia.

    The airports are a necessary prerequisite for defending Poland, but far from a sufficiency.

Comments are closed.