I think it's called strategic incompetency, but to each their own.
You are right that he eu/us should have done this from the start though, this kinda feels like a last ditch attempt to appear strong against the ever increasing Russian war machine.

When Latvia start murdering and oppressing Russian speakers to the point of ethnic cleansing, we will brush the dust of the F-35's.

In reality the Russian war machine has proven incapable of taking control of all but 19% of the poorest country in Europe; Not even a NATO country at that.

The threat is real, but not to NATO.

So is this going to be the Mission Accomplished of 2024? Say "Russia only took 19% of Ukraine"?

Idk is this your strawman of the day?

I believe that this is the fall back plan. but as it stands the war is funded for another 3 years right?

Russia is winning the war, spinning it as 'only 19% of Ukraine' is like saying America successfully occupied all of Afghanistan for a full 20 years.
We all know how this ends

Sure. If "winning" the war is 19% of Ukraines territory, they have smashed it out the park; Not sure why that was a sore point for you?
They made the 4 Oblasts part of the Russian federation, and they don't even control all of any of those Oblasts... So spinning it as a win is kind of threadbare even by Russian expectation.

I can foresee Russian pushing and gaining ground over this year. Especially if more US equipment is not forthcoming.

Talking about winning or losing is pretty infantile. Theres going to be a negotiation at some stage and what matters is the military position either side possesses at that stage.
As it stands Russian ground forces have or are close to gaining a tactical advantage. Near air support is proving effective, even if it has meant the loss of a large amount of fast jets in a short time.

Ukraine have made a tactical success in forcing the Russian navy east, even abandoning Sevastopol as a main base; They are degrading Russian oil infrastructure with drone attacks which Russia is seemingly unable to prevent.
This however is asymmetrical success and won't greatly effect any leverage Ukraine can have in any negotiation.

Afaik Putin came out in an interview and said there is no point in negotiating if Ukraine is running low on ammunition.

This post was edited by Prox1m1ty on Mar 14 2024 02:57pm

You can see how adverse people become to talking about winning or losing when they're losing, if you look at the backlash against the pope learning to parle en francais.
American ran its war machine up against Russia's war machine, we put Patriots on the ground and operated them with little green men and odds are some alien autopsies will emerge in coming weeks and put Biden in a tough spot. We're going to have to come to grips with what it means to lose the Ukraine war. If that means salvaging as much as we can in negotiations, it better happen sooner than later. But in the grander scheme, it means NATO isn't measuring up to Russia and can't win its proxy wars even with such a lopsided degree of external support. It means America can't just swing its big dick around and expect the unaligned world to fall in line under our threats