[GK3]

IMO the previous administration's policy was ill-advised because it did not articulate a plan for Ukraine to win. It became increasingly clear that no such plan existed, or if it did, it had failed. Confronted with that situation, no "new" plan was made. We just kept doing what we were doing and hoped that eventually Russia would quit. Hope is not a plan.

If it was entirely in your hands, and you wanted to give Ukraine the best possible chance of winning without materially increasing the chance of a nuclear response from Russia, what, specifically, would you recommend that the U. S. government / U. S. military do?

As others have already said, it is a complex question.  There are few things that would be likely to be the really wrong things to do.  First, NO "advisors" on the ground or in the air. That would be a good example of mission creep that Russia might not stand for.  I am sure we have a few people advising at the highest level, and perhaps some tech trainers, but we have to stay away from attaching people to their combat units. I think the biggest thing Ukraine needs is better and/or more air defense weapons and more ability to conduct SEAD operations. Russia seems intend on trying to destroy the Ukrainian populace's willing to continue to support the battle. I think we need as much clarity regarding Putin's situation as we can get.  If Putin really can't survive failing to take Ukraine or enough of it to say he did, it could get messy.

I ran across this article and was shocked to see that a single Patriot battery retails for 1 Billion dollars. I guess I am completely out of touch with the high cost of going to war in today's world. That said, I have no idea of how many missiles one gets for 1 billion. I hope it is a lot.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/11/world...raine.html

One more edit: While not a fan, I have to like the concept of selling stuff to NATO and then having them move the stuff on to Ukraine, if it actually ends up working that way. That NATO countries are willing to do this is indicative of their change in attitude on defense and Russia. My only question is what is Ukraine going to shoot those patriots at? While I am sure they can keep Russian aircraft further at bay, but cheap drones obviously will not be their target. What do we have that can help with targeting the drone swarms Russia is launching. I think anything we can to support Ukrainian efforts at SEAD/DEAD would be money well spent by who ever spends it.

[GK3]

IMO the previous administration's policy was ill-advised because it did not articulate a plan for Ukraine to win. It became increasingly clear that no such plan existed, or if it did, it had failed. Confronted with that situation, no "new" plan was made. We just kept doing what we were doing and hoped that eventually Russia would quit. Hope is not a plan.

If it was entirely in your hands, and you wanted to give Ukraine the best possible chance of winning without materially increasing the chance of a nuclear response from Russia, what, specifically, would you recommend that the U. S. government / U. S. military do?

As others have already said, it is a complex question.  There are few things that would be likely to be the really wrong things to do.  First, NO "advisors" on the ground or in the air. That would be a good example of mission creep that Russia might not stand for.  I am sure we have a few people advising at the highest level, and perhaps some tech trainers, but we have to stay away from attaching people to their combat units. I think the biggest thing Ukraine needs is better and/or more air defense weapons and more ability to conduct SEAD operations. Russia seems intend on trying to destroy the Ukrainian populace's willing to continue to support the battle. I think we need as much clarity regarding Putin's situation as we can get.  If Putin really can't survive failing to take Ukraine or enough of it to say he did, it could get messy.

I ran across this article and was shocked to see that a single Patriot battery retails for 1 Billion dollars. I guess I am completely out of touch with the high cost of going to war in today's world. That said, I have no idea of how many missiles one gets for 1 billion. I hope it is a lot.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/11/world...raine.html

One more edit: While not a fan, I have to like the concept of selling stuff to NATO and then having them move the stuff on to Ukraine, if it actually ends up working that way. That NATO countries are willing to do this is indicative of their change in attitude on defense and Russia. My only question is what is Ukraine going to shoot those patriots at? While I am sure they can keep Russian aircraft further at bay, but cheap drones obviously will not be their target. What do we have that can help with targeting the drone swarms Russia is launching. I think anything we can to support Ukrainian efforts at SEAD/DEAD would be money well spent by who ever spends it.