[...]
"Ukraine can keep fighting for years. ...Ukraine is in a better position than early in the war" that's a very...interesting statement, contrary to what everyone else have been reporting. When you say Ukraine can keep fighting for years, when do you think Ukraine would need to drop conscription age further to 21, and then mobilize women? Guessing you'd support such moves too right? Anything to demilitarize Russia just a tiny bit more?
With recruits dwindling, Ukraine is urged to mobilise women Chief military adviser for gender issues says adopting Israel-style female conscription policy is necessary to tackle recruitment shortage
...
As well as suffering from a shortage of munitions, Ukraine is increasingly in need of manpower, with army chiefs saying that as many as 500,000 new recruits will be needed this year.
Both are correct, Ukraine needed ammo and systems in the date of those articles (roughly 10 days ago) AKA a shitmetricton of 155MM in the frontlines. Since then, an aid package nearly as big as what was given by US between early 2022 and late 2023 has been approved and it will not take long to get to where is needed.
Look, Ruzzia knows. Why do you think they are pressing regardless of losses?
Ukraine has the artillery and the trained manpower to stabilise the front if given ammo. Ukraine has developed a number of techniques that make good use of what they can get - e.g. able to impact refineries several hundred miles away from the front. US and Ukraine are now clear about what works and what does not work in Ukraine, so no more pressure to launch an offensive. Ruzzia has used up quite a few of their resources and Ukraine is achieving some tactical advantages in sea and air by attacking ships & airfields. The water is boiling for the frog.
On regards to recruiting, yes it is necessary, just like in Ruzzia, but no, not half a million. Many soldiers have been too long in the frontline and there needs to be rotation. But when choosing an option, you must look at the other option: if you do not recruit, Ukraine population will be equally diminished by Ruzzian action. Just look at the population of Ruzzia itself during the last decades and the Ukrainian population pyramid. Letting Moscow choose your fait is a slow suicide - or a fast one if another Stalin decides to mass-kill all the farmers.

@Branko, it is not a good idea to send zero armour vehicles full of people in frontal assaults and Ruzzia is doing it. What is the point of discussing it?
I see, so still pushing the narrative that Ukraine is totally winning because its super-soldiers became uber-effective with some tech that will surely become a game changer. They just need to continue to give up land, and mobilize women

Should they continue doing it in stages, drop the conscription age first to 21 before dropping it to 18 (you know boiling the frog), or just start conscripting 18yr olds right away? You know, because they're winning so hard, and things are better than ever for Ukraine? Do you think loosing Kharkiv wouldn't be a bad for Ukraine too? Because everything can be spun as a positive, willing to accept any Ukrainian loss as long as Russia is demilitarized a bit more for the US?
Hint: Do not look up population stats for Ukraine, just keep looking for any negative stat you can find on Russia, just make sure to present it in a vacuum without providing objective content.
...
LOL cherry season still in full swing apparently. Anything to avoid thinking as to why you need those cherries to begin with.
Back up your words or stop attempting to fool people. Find any major news outlets that claim that Ukraine is doing good at the front (overall not some marginal local victory), then we'll see who's cherry picking.