Wow, a very well researched piece that digs much deeper into the Ukrainian conflict than most. The success of the Ukrainian HIMARS systems has been widely reported, as has the recent ineffectiveness of Ukrainian drones. It would seem that ultimately a) The more indefensible Russian ultrasonic missiles may be in shorter supply, while b) the standard Russian missiles may be threatened by anti-missile defenses, HIMARS (or equal) attacks on launch sites.

These are all important lessons in modern warfare. Apparently Russian tanks/ground troops are ineffective against determined resistance, so they have to level the enemy with bombs (as they did in WW II, Chechnya, Syria, etc). But now even that may have diminishing returns.

It seems NATO has the luxury of "staying out of the war" while supplying the Ukraine with endless weapons (especially defensive ones), and this "war of attrition" will eventually attrite in favor of Ukraine.

Of course, if Russia can't hold Eastern Ukraine, how could they ever hope to "cleanse" Europe? (starting with Poland/Moldova/Baltics?) I wonder if the Belarus people are getting nervous right about now?

Question: Would a NATO blockage of the Black Sea be a kind of "game over" for Russia, since so many of their missiles now have to be launched from ships? Wouldn't these ships also be sitting ducks for advanced Ukrainian missile systems?

Putin's war turns out to have all the knucklehead battle logic of the Jan 6 attack on the Capitol...all vitriol with little regard to supply lines or end games. One hopes their supplies run out soon and they come to their senses.