It would be a very sad state of affairs if NATO basically used the Ukrainians to soak up as much damage as the Russians can inflict in order to weaken it, whilst giving only as little support as necessary, and by dragging the war on.
However it's clear that NATO is also mindful of the fact that Ukraine is currently well led by a capable democratic leader, but that might not be the case in a year or 2, so don't give them too many toys.
Saying that, as an armchair general I would like to see Ukraine driving a wedge to the west of Mariupol down to the sea, and a wedge just south of Kherson to surround the forces there. Secondly they could cross over into Russia via Bolgorod and attack the eastern forces from behind, whilst taking out as much military (including propaganda channels) and rail infra on the way.
The land bridge to Crimea should be reduced to rubble and the port at Sevastopol disabled.
Don't know that they have the man power for that, but that should give the old dictator something to worry about.
However it's clear that NATO is also mindful of the fact that Ukraine is currently well led by a capable democratic leader, but that might not be the case in a year or 2, so don't give them too many toys.
Saying that, as an armchair general I would like to see Ukraine driving a wedge to the west of Mariupol down to the sea, and a wedge just south of Kherson to surround the forces there. Secondly they could cross over into Russia via Bolgorod and attack the eastern forces from behind, whilst taking out as much military (including propaganda channels) and rail infra on the way.
The land bridge to Crimea should be reduced to rubble and the port at Sevastopol disabled.
Don't know that they have the man power for that, but that should give the old dictator something to worry about.