Turns out that the 50 NATO countries supporting Ukraine, led by the United States, recently discussed how much and what Kiev will have to surrender (not only territory) in order to enter into peace negotiations with Russia and how the collective West can save face.
These considerations are caused both by an analysis of the dynamics at the front, and by the situation in these European countries and in the States, where there is a deadlock in the issue of supplying Ukraine, and Russia’s supply seems endless.
Ukraine is experiencing problems with mobilization, even to the point of protests for demobilization and the methods of the Ukrainian authorities to send new meat to the front.
As the war drags on the calls for surrender will become tougher and the west will begin to demand faster surrender with more concessions. The impasse over aid to Ukraine is only growing stronger as attention shifts to Israel’s war with Hamas.
It’s also worth noting the rhetoric about a certain “dead end” on the battlefield where supposedly neither side can advance successfully that’s now being parroted all across western media. The simple truth that Russia is winning can’t be printed in the mainstream media, but a dead end narrative is politically acceptable. Both Arestovich and Zaluzhny recently expressed themselves in the same vein.
That wasn’t really the case with South Vietnam, they continued fighting for almost 4-5 years and the straw that broke the camels back was that they could no longer get fuel due to the Oil Crisis, and the US stopped sending them parts and ammunition for their American weapons, something the South Vietnamese were able to make themselves.
I mean, the USAF still operated, it was just US soldiers who stopped being on the ground.
True, but the massive air operations of the late 60’s was a long gone memory.
It was small scale raids, reconnaissance, and limited air superiority missions.