I think that's a bit unfair. Ukraine have avoided mass mobilization partly because the benefit of mobilization has to be balanced against the impact it'll have on the economy, and partly because they might not even be able to equip that many recruits. They requested enough equipment last summer to equip 14 brigades for their offensive and got less than 4 brigades worth for example.
To be fair I haven't seen any complaints from other countries about the lack of mobilization. I do wonder how much longer Ukraine can avoid it though, they seem to be outnumbered in every region they're fighting in.
Think the limitations in sending large amounts of armour at that time stems from the fact that there wasn’t enough training capacity to train crews. Even with the limited amount sent this eventually played out when many Leopards were lost due to accidents or misuse of the equipment during the offensive that left many modern variants captured by the Russians.
As for the mobilization issue, it’s more of the various troops on the ground that are complaining why they can’t end this war decisively. The longer things drag on the more people die. I am sure from the Ukranian point of view is that they are piling up the Russian bodies and blowing up more tanks, and time is on their side. But time costs people, and the bitterness from continual combat deaths stemming from defensive actions which end up in retreats is building up in resentment for the leadership. Putin also believes he has time on his side, and therefore we are largely in a stalemate.
Sorry no I don't agree, America (and Europe) has drip fed aid especially hardware and amunition, they don't care about Ukranian lives. Not sure what nukes have to do with it, America is blocking the UK/France from allowed Ukraine to use their long range missiles on Russian soil, the biggest thing allowing Russia to advance is their aviation and the glide bombs which over time just destroy any defences in a sector and the meat waves advance.
America blocked f16's from being sent, they have slowed down training of pilots.
American don't want Ukraine to win, they want a never ending war to buffering their own manufacturing economy, that's the only explanation of the last 2 years of weak support.
The thing about continual support for Ukraine is based largely on new manufacturing capacity to produce new weapons that can replenish stocks. While the Russian economy is on a full war footing, we know that the same can’t be said for Western powers. To increase military aid is to reduce operational capability in said countries. And for some this could be a one shot proposition, so many are reluctant to take those decisions.
While the US still has large Cold War stocks remaining, for example, there are no new large scale manufacturing of AFV’s (or new designs thereof) for example, that can fill the void. And the old vehicles that are transferred often need upgrades ‘or downgrades’ which require work to be done with limited tank overhaul capacity. The funding for these projects are often tied down in quagmire as congress refuses to fund large tranches for Ukraine even though, oddly enough as you rightly pointed it out, the money gets cycled back down to American industries who will be doing these things.
Air defense is another, western countries have traditionally had very little investment in air defense systems. Anything given to the Ukranians now are from operational units in Europe and the US. While new build systems such as the IRIS T is coming online, they are only building something like 4 systems a year next year. The Germans themselves have lagged behind expanding arms production as popular sentiment there dislikes giving public money to private enterprises like Rhinemetall to make more weapons. Many of the countries that have sent Leopard 2’s to Ukraine were given assurances by the Germans that they will have new manufactured stocks to replace them, they have yet to materialise in any shape or form.
Then you move onto issues like sending fighter aircraft in large mounts to airfields that are not able to be defended with the lack of air defence. Traditionally, western powers defend their airspace by using air power instead of ground based systems, but a lot of their fighters fly from prepared fields with large support structures and teams. Without large scale AWACS capability (they are receiving one aircraft from Sweden soon) this is still just a pipe dream. So there is no point as of yet to send huge amount of fighters there, as all they will become are targets on the ground for Russian missiles.
Don’t believe the conspiracies. Everything has a logical explanation.
