[Goose]

If next year Ukraine is in similar shape as now, they are indeed pretty much dead. If the West is unwilling/unable to provide what Ukraine needs, they need to seek the best deal they can get which won't be a good deal. On the other hand if the F 16's prove really useful and NATO and the USA continue to supply needed arms and ammunition., the result may be different.

Indeed! IMO the accompanying requirement is that Ukraine needs to dictate the place and tempo of the conflict. Russia doesn't do well when it has to react to changing situations not of its own choosing. Ukraine had a period where they had the initiative. Unfortunately Ukraine was unable to execute their offensive. Having F-16s and adequate ammunition will help them in a new offensive operation. They also need lots of other material, like adequate effective minefield  breaching equipment. They also need trained troops that can move rapidly and exploit opportunities. It won't be easy.

I do not see Russia being able to do anything to throw more mostly untrained troops into the meat grinder, and being forced to use older and older equipment to support their opporations.  I believe NATO and the West can give Ukraine what it needs to win, or at least survive if we have the will.  Maybe whoever wins the drone war wins the war.

FWIW I think "survive" for Ukraine just isn't an option. Russia will grind them down. IMO the side that can dictate the course of the war will win. Granted, this is a tautology, but IMO Ukraine must keep Russia on its back foot and inflict disproportionate casualties when advancing, not retreating. You can't retreat your way to victory. Drones can for certain help make that happen. Drone strikes that cut of Russian logistics at key moments can change the nature of a battle. However the key is to make Russia fight when and where you want, not visa-versa.

[Goose]

If next year Ukraine is in similar shape as now, they are indeed pretty much dead. If the West is unwilling/unable to provide what Ukraine needs, they need to seek the best deal they can get which won't be a good deal. On the other hand if the F 16's prove really useful and NATO and the USA continue to supply needed arms and ammunition., the result may be different.

Indeed! IMO the accompanying requirement is that Ukraine needs to dictate the place and tempo of the conflict. Russia doesn't do well when it has to react to changing situations not of its own choosing. Ukraine had a period where they had the initiative. Unfortunately Ukraine was unable to execute their offensive. Having F-16s and adequate ammunition will help them in a new offensive operation. They also need lots of other material, like adequate effective minefield  breaching equipment. They also need trained troops that can move rapidly and exploit opportunities. It won't be easy.

I do not see Russia being able to do anything to throw more mostly untrained troops into the meat grinder, and being forced to use older and older equipment to support their opporations.  I believe NATO and the West can give Ukraine what it needs to win, or at least survive if we have the will.  Maybe whoever wins the drone war wins the war.

FWIW I think "survive" for Ukraine just isn't an option. Russia will grind them down. IMO the side that can dictate the course of the war will win. Granted, this is a tautology, but IMO Ukraine must keep Russia on its back foot and inflict disproportionate casualties when advancing, not retreating. You can't retreat your way to victory. Drones can for certain help make that happen. Drone strikes that cut of Russian logistics at key moments can change the nature of a battle. However the key is to make Russia fight when and where you want, not visa-versa.