I'm factoring in the logistical and bureaucratic bottlenecks that have been slowing up US factory construction and factory enlargement for decades, more than public sentiment.
Without new factories putting gear out, there is limit to how much production can be increased on existing production lines, and new arms/weapons factories end up delayed and fucked with by NIMBY's and often green groups who oppose things on environmental grounds.
Public support for Ukraine is also dropping, and Congress won't pass a new aid package.
It's reality, feeling are facts in and of themselves, and public fuck-ups on the scale that Zelensky did can have decades of repercussions.
He eventually apologized to Trump in a letter, but doesn't appear willing to publicly admit he made a mistake.
Zelensky is someone I used to view as another Churchill, but now see an actor who has overplayed his part, has a support/film/production crew that are not exactly doing him any favors in their own competence, and publicity agents blowing diplomatic/PR smoke up his ass that inflated his ego to an unhealthy degree.
I believe Zelensky is a brave and righteous man, but righteousness is a poor substitute for competence and effectiveness, and I think he's been puffed up so much his ego and anger at Russia overrode his better judgement, and may be continuing to do so.
We will see if the mineral deal actually comes through this week, as he and Trump have talked about.
No, because North Korea isn't running out of gear or troops, and Putin has no problem leaning on the Norks for both.
The idea to run Russia out of gear was viable, but a long shot, until Kim became involved; now, it's a farcical fantasy that ignores current realities.
We may be able to run Putin out of funds to pay for more gear from the Norks, but attrition on the battlefield isn't going to work very well when North Korea can always expand it's own production, or even help improve production numbers inside Russia itself.
What's that old Chinese proverb about 'The punishment for treason is death, the punishment for being late is death; we are late."
When no amount of previous support for Ukraine counts for a damn, the second you say Zelensky fucked up and/or that UA's in a bad position that more munitions and arms sales are unlikely to fix, then people are going to get burned out on Ukraine as an issue and start to feel it was all just about leftist-style virtue signalling about the conflict, not actual good faith debates or discussions.
There is very little attempt to understand and address the issues causing UA to lose support, and a lot of attempts to shame and belittle people, even previously ardent UA supporters, for daring to say that Zelensky fucked up and/or that UA's not in a position to get what it wants for a 'victory', and will have to make a deal that it may not like, if it wants to survive as a nation.
I think that getting support for stocking up for defense of Taiwan has more bipartisan support and a better chance of getting through Congress, at this point, compared to making it about Ukraine.
Democrats, NAFO-types, and some actions by Zelensky and UA's gov that amounted to playing teamball in US domestic politics were not a good idea, and effectively showed UA is more a Democrat project/issue than a bipartisan issue. The way many in Ukraine and Europe have talked about and treated Trump and his admin hasn't helped things either; I remember the talks of 'Trump-proofing' before and after the election, which did nothing to breed good will between Trump's base and Ukraine.
And when I was speaking of heavy lift capacity, that included boats/ships; the US merchant marine and logistics fleet is not very big these days, and all of it will be needed in the Pacific if things go hot over Taiwan. Perhaps some European military shipping/transport groups/operations could try to fill the gap, but I am not as familiar with them.
Except last I saw, SK wasn't going to send lethal aid to Ukraine or let Ukraine buy their gear directly, because they have their own relations with Russia to consider.