This would make sense if the regime command structure had apparently not designed itself for this exact type of conflict.

They were in a fight, took losses, and made significant gains.

They proved their planning was correct, that the distributed nature of their power grid was correct, that they are able to project force and genuinely destabilize the strait.

Things have been proven that were previously uncertain, and they have not been proven in America’s favour.

Crucially America’s ability to defend its allies was tested and found wanting. The entire conflict was of unit economics, in that a cheap 30k drone beat out billion dollar investments.

America also spent the better part of this administration alienating themselves from the one allied nation with extensive drone combat experience.

▲

iugtmkbdfil834 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Admittedly, this is the interesting part. Ukraine via its leader apparently did try to reach US in exchange for money, but, and there stories get confused, was ignored. I have to wonder if Trump has some actual fixed winners table in his mind ( because he does not seem to follow the most optimal path ).

	▲	intended 26 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		The issue is that everyone is using the template of a “US President” to do the heavy lifting when analyzing Trump. Trump is performing the act of what his voter base thinks a President should appear to be doing. He has a group of people who have hitched their cart to his, and feed into his beliefs. Underlying that are the rank opportunists and the people who were waiting for this chance to change the nature of the American system to better combat the impact of science and “out of touch ivory tower liberals”, or whatever term of the day is. Looking for the Emperor’s new clothes is always going to suggest that there is a pattern, since it depends on your ability to believe there is method to the madness.