[Goose]

And I expect the US and the West should be able to sustain high levels of aid for at least a few more years. The aid to Ukraine is a very small fraction of US overall military spending and its probably the best value on the dollar of that.

I agree with this idea. The US can continue at the current level for as long as we want without creating big problems. I would prefer us to increase it in order to achieve faster results.

Zelensky's support remains very high, and hard to foresee that changing absent a major defeat, which Ukraine hasn't suffered since Mariupol.

This is an area we disagree. I think Zelenskyy's support will survive defeat but not stagnation. The Ukrainian people right now believe they are going to win. The problem will arise when it appears this war is going to go on forever. At that point people will start looking for an alternative. They have to see a way ahead. Right now, they do. When they don't is when trouble arises. Zelenskyy is very aware of this and that is one reason he is pushing back so hard on the US intelligence estimate regarding Ukraine's ability to execute an offensive in the near term. He knows his nation doesn't want to face that.

Russia hasn't been able to shut down Ukrainian railways or keep the lights off in major cities for sustained periods of time yet, in spite of using up all their best stuff already. Hard to see that changing any time soon.

Russia hasn't "used up all their best stuff". They are undoubtedly in a "hand to mouth" mode on Kalibr-KH-101 class missiles, but they keep making them. Every raid features several of them. These are the weapons that wreck specific targets with high accuracy. The S-400 missiles will undoubtedly be used in greater quantities to complicate the air defense problem  as well as to damage areas in somewhat random ways. The KH-22s are also a nuisance that inflicts damage somewhat at random. They carry a big warhead so they do lots of damage even when they miss their notional target.

As far as keeping the lights off in major cities, Russia has been relatively successful.
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/uk...-continue/
The damage to infrastructure tends to be cumulative with a tipping point. Once the damage gets too bad, things can go downhill fast. The Ukrainian's urgent requests for more air defense systems shows they know this is a problem. It is not just that the winter brings on situations where no electricity means no heat. It also means that many manufacturing facilities can't function at all in any season. In no way has Ukraine reached a steady state where things are getting fixed as fast as they are being destroyed. Ukraine also uses electric traction on most of it's main rail lines. Trains are still running, but as the damage to the power grid accumulates, that can change.

I still think Ukraine can win. However, like Zelenskyy I believe now is the time. He too believes time is not on Ukraine's side. As I previously cited:
https://news.yahoo.com/zelenskyy-russia-...p_catchall

[Goose]

And I expect the US and the West should be able to sustain high levels of aid for at least a few more years. The aid to Ukraine is a very small fraction of US overall military spending and its probably the best value on the dollar of that.

I agree with this idea. The US can continue at the current level for as long as we want without creating big problems. I would prefer us to increase it in order to achieve faster results.

Zelensky's support remains very high, and hard to foresee that changing absent a major defeat, which Ukraine hasn't suffered since Mariupol.

This is an area we disagree. I think Zelenskyy's support will survive defeat but not stagnation. The Ukrainian people right now believe they are going to win. The problem will arise when it appears this war is going to go on forever. At that point people will start looking for an alternative. They have to see a way ahead. Right now, they do. When they don't is when trouble arises. Zelenskyy is very aware of this and that is one reason he is pushing back so hard on the US intelligence estimate regarding Ukraine's ability to execute an offensive in the near term. He knows his nation doesn't want to face that.

Russia hasn't been able to shut down Ukrainian railways or keep the lights off in major cities for sustained periods of time yet, in spite of using up all their best stuff already. Hard to see that changing any time soon.

Russia hasn't "used up all their best stuff". They are undoubtedly in a "hand to mouth" mode on Kalibr-KH-101 class missiles, but they keep making them. Every raid features several of them. These are the weapons that wreck specific targets with high accuracy. The S-400 missiles will undoubtedly be used in greater quantities to complicate the air defense problem  as well as to damage areas in somewhat random ways. The KH-22s are also a nuisance that inflicts damage somewhat at random. They carry a big warhead so they do lots of damage even when they miss their notional target.

As far as keeping the lights off in major cities, Russia has been relatively successful.
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/uk...-continue/
The damage to infrastructure tends to be cumulative with a tipping point. Once the damage gets too bad, things can go downhill fast. The Ukrainian's urgent requests for more air defense systems shows they know this is a problem. It is not just that the winter brings on situations where no electricity means no heat. It also means that many manufacturing facilities can't function at all in any season. In no way has Ukraine reached a steady state where things are getting fixed as fast as they are being destroyed. Ukraine also uses electric traction on most of it's main rail lines. Trains are still running, but as the damage to the power grid accumulates, that can change.

I still think Ukraine can win. However, like Zelenskyy I believe now is the time. He too believes time is not on Ukraine's side. As I previously cited:
https://news.yahoo.com/zelenskyy-russia-...p_catchall