[Goose]

Based on the WaPo article, why not just provide advanced anti-aircraft defenses?  Ukraine has the advantage of merely needing to defend already-entrenched infantry in the Donbas. As long as Russia can’t get air supremacy, Ukraine should be able to defend itself with artillery. Throw in the Mi-17 helicopters for good measure.

Already entrenched infantry works as long as you are fighting paramilitary forces who have no armor. Against a mobile armored force in the tank paradise that is that part of Ukraine, it is suicide. That is why Ukraine wants armor, because they know that is the only way to prevent their infantry from being flanked/encircled. Russia is messed up, but they are not that messed up. Even in WWII the Germans demonstrated what armor could do in that region. You punch a hole in the defense, flow tanks through the hole and fan out behind the trenches. No further fighting necessary. The infantry isn't going anywhere, and they are cut off. No supply trucks, no food, no water, no ammo. Game over.

Provide what anti-aircraft defenses? Since the HAWK was retired in 1990, the US has had no medium altitude air defense weapon that was mobile enough to defend infantry. We have no equivalent of the Pantsir or Tor. We rely on our air force, period. The Patriot is a great system but it is more like the S-300. The Patriot is even less mobile than the S-300. You also can't teach somebody to operate and maintain a Patriot battery in a month. So what do we give them?

[Goose]

Based on the WaPo article, why not just provide advanced anti-aircraft defenses?  Ukraine has the advantage of merely needing to defend already-entrenched infantry in the Donbas. As long as Russia can’t get air supremacy, Ukraine should be able to defend itself with artillery. Throw in the Mi-17 helicopters for good measure.

Already entrenched infantry works as long as you are fighting paramilitary forces who have no armor. Against a mobile armored force in the tank paradise that is that part of Ukraine, it is suicide. That is why Ukraine wants armor, because they know that is the only way to prevent their infantry from being flanked/encircled. Russia is messed up, but they are not that messed up. Even in WWII the Germans demonstrated what armor could do in that region. You punch a hole in the defense, flow tanks through the hole and fan out behind the trenches. No further fighting necessary. The infantry isn't going anywhere, and they are cut off. No supply trucks, no food, no water, no ammo. Game over.

Provide what anti-aircraft defenses? Since the HAWK was retired in 1990, the US has had no medium altitude air defense weapon that was mobile enough to defend infantry. We have no equivalent of the Pantsir or Tor. We rely on our air force, period. The Patriot is a great system but it is more like the S-300. The Patriot is even less mobile than the S-300. You also can't teach somebody to operate and maintain a Patriot battery in a month. So what do we give them?