I would like to think so. The current scenario seems like a combination of damage control and optics. Maybe it is related to Trump's ambition to secure a controlling interest in Ukrainian resources for the sake of cost recovery, but he is trying to seek two conflicting objectives (death avoidance and financial gain) while Zelensky wants neither of them to occur. Nor does Russia have much interest in those objectives, for which I can hardly blame them.
The problem with carrying multiple objectives in combat is that it will always come down to which one is paramount, and the necessity of ending on that point. People misunderstand the choice to use atomic bombs to end the War with Japan. It indeed worked out to result in fewer deaths all around---but that was not the objective. The objective was to have the fewest American deaths. It was as simple as that. And needs no defense.
I would like to think so. The current scenario seems like a combination of damage control and optics. Maybe it is related to Trump's ambition to secure a controlling interest in Ukrainian resources for the sake of cost recovery, but he is trying to seek two conflicting objectives (death avoidance and financial gain) while Zelensky wants neither of them to occur. Nor does Russia have much interest in those objectives, for which I can hardly blame them.
The problem with carrying multiple objectives in combat is that it will always come down to which one is paramount, and the necessity of ending on that point. People misunderstand the choice to use atomic bombs to end the War with Japan. It indeed worked out to result in fewer deaths all around---but that was not the objective. The objective was to have the fewest American deaths. It was as simple as that. And needs no defense.