Asklemmy

did the west miscalculate the situation by allowing diplomacy to take a backseat and allowing Ukraine to a large plethora of military resources?

a large plethora of military resources

No. The West failed to provide Ukraine with sufficient military resources. While the monetary value of military aid may seem substantial when compared to your bank account, the reality is that Russia possesses greater resources and capabilities.

It's mostly a war of attrition now, whoever can hold the stalemate longer than the other before everything unravels will win.

Russia. It's a war of attrition and Russia has the manpower and industrial capacity

the west didn't misread the situatiom because the west doesn't care about Ukraine they just wanted to kill people

I don't think either side will be able to decisively beat the other, but that's not how these things usually end anyway.

Actually, I think it's pretty funny in a sad sort of way that Americans don't get how this is going to go. It's really obvious that Ukraine doesn't need to win, they just need to keep fighting until Russia goes home. Western aid isn't even really making much of a difference in the eventual outcome of the war, it's just reducing the damage that Russia is doing to Ukraine and bring that inevitable end closer faster. We've seen over, and over, and over again that once a group of people actually make up their minds to resist, there is nothing that can stop them. Even if the aggressor can bring overwhelming military superiority they will eventually give up and go home, and Russia can't even do that.

The question isn't who will win. The question is how many war crimes will Putin commit before admitting he lost this war in the second week.

It's stalemate at the moment. It's a waiting game for Western support of Ukraine to drop or for something domestically in Russia to fail.

Seems like a stalemate at the moment but it could really go either way from what I can tell. It depends upon if the west will lose interest and cut back on support or if public opinion in Russia wanes towards wanting an end to the war. At the moment it seems neither side is willing to accept the current status quo.

me

Raytheon and Lockheed-Martin shareholders. BAE and Rheinmetall investors are probably doing well, too.

Seems Russia is slowly grinding out Ukraine and if Russia decides to give up at any point or Ukraine negotiates then russia will probably have gained territory.

I'm not qualified to speak on this. It is however my opinion that in war, nobody wins, but military suppliers make bank.

To answer "who's winning" can vary based on what "winning" is looks like, or what the goals were. As others have pointed out those goals have changed over time.

For a play by play recap I listen to Denys Davydov... He seems upfront about both Ukranian and Russian victories in his analysis based on various video, image and map reports, even if he supports the Ukraine side.

I tend to think as well that the situation in Ukraine is currently a stalemate. The fact is that, while Russia is losing weapons, Ukraine is gaining them. There's also a different quality of life for Western weapons compared to the Russian ones because, well, that's something that the West actually cared for back in the Cold War days. USSR and its satellites only cared about meeting the 5-year quota, or whatever they cared for in order to show the West they were more industrialized and whatnot. Western weapons are also more accurate and tends to integrate more hi-tech inside, so that you can use them for one-strike-one-kill instead of carpet bombing large swaths of land until nothing moves there. This is why, e.g. you have Grad systems with around 42 projectiles or so, all usually being fired in chain, while on HIMARS you only have a maximum of 6 projectiles, which are usually fired individually.

All this now proves vital for Ukraine, as it has to fight a country with a larger manpower, a larger (pre-war at least) stock of vehicles and a larger stock of ammunition. Ukraine, however, did not manage to become a powerful force on the counter-offensive. It does a great job at hardening Russian attacks, causing incredible amounts of damage for every inch of land lost, but the required weaponry for a successful breakthrough has been in short supply. Besides that, what Ukraine initially planned to do was to do a combined arms attack. And you cannot do this without a good amount of air support - which Ukraine was and is currently lacking.

IMO, it remains to be seen what will happen when Ukraine will finally start to operate F-16 jets (among other equipment it started to build in-house like drones), but as of now, on the equipment and fighting side, Ukraine is currently winning. On the loss side, while Russia loses more people and equipment than Ukraine, I'm afraid the numbers are proportionally the same for both sides. This is why I see it as heading to a stalemate in the foreseeable future. But Russia can no longer win what it initially planned, it is constantly changing the objectives in order to show the world that it achieved something, and Ukraine simply cannot lose. Russia's only advantage right now is being on the offensive itself.

The war is largely in a stalemate at the moment. Odds are, if this continues for years longer, Russia will eventually win just by virtue of having more people to send to die for the country, but if it comes to that, Russia will suffer far moreso than they already are, both due to increased strikes within Russia and just loosing the majority of their working population.

Well Russia holds a good amount of Ukrainian land. The fighting is essentially a stalemate. Russia may have "won" that land.

No one may win any more sizable land moves. For future fighting we'll have to see. Ukraine relies on Western support because Russia is a bigger economy and bigger population. We'll have to see how Western support continues and how the Russian economy proceeds with sanctions.