LtCOL. Tony Shaffer : Is War in Ukraine Nearing Its End?

The U.S. has minimal strategic interest in Ukraine, and continued weapon supply benefits the military-industrial complex while depleting U.S. resources.

The war is primarily driven by competition over newly discovered gas and oil reserves in the region, not by liberation narratives. Supplying high-tech weapons to Ukraine has significantly depleted U.S. reserves, endangering the ability to meet other strategic objectives.

U.S. intelligence agencies are providing essential GPS and targeting data for Ukrainian strikes, but this proxy support does not legally make the U.S. a co-belligerent.

The U.S. acts as a co-belligerent by providing intelligence that enables Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory.

A diplomatic agreement from the Alaska summit has been discarded due to hardline shifts by figures like Marco Rubio, prolonging the war. Neocons are falsely portraying limited Ukrainian deep strikes as winning the war to pressure Putin, ignoring that conventional victory is impossible.

Ukraine must not be an outpost against either side but should function as a bridge to ensure its survival and thrive.

Neutrality is the only viable path for Ukraine because Russia's historical trauma from repeated invasions necessitates a buffer zone it will never relinquish.

NATO lacks independent combat power and relies entirely on U.S. logistics and command, making European threats against Russia illogical.

NATO is gradually seeping into the area, deploying new weapon systems and ramping up tensions that pose serious threats to Russia.

Putin's warnings about a NATO threat are primarily intended for domestic audiences, as intelligence shows NATO lacks the capacity for a decisive offensive.

Trump's low approval stems from bad advice on Iran and a reliance on decapitation strikes sold by Benjamin Netanyahu. The U.S. Navy is under severe strain due to an abnormally high combat tempo, evidenced by supply issues and personnel stress on the USS Abraham Lincoln.