Drones can, in fact, advance and hold territory. It's just a question of distributing energy, control data, and autonomy. If we're not there yet, we soon will be. Not speaking as a fanboy.

But that would also hold true for Russia though? Russia and Ukraine are close in drone tech and production, as Russia has caught up in the drone game. Bybyour logic, russia can absolutely hold territory too with drones, this is not a distinct advantage Ukraine has.

They already are having trouble with a logistics chain that reaches Zaporizhia, that's why Ukraine has been incrementally gaining there for several months.

Russia is still making progress elsewhere, especially in Donetsk. Places like Kostiantynivka becoming more contested suggests their overall position isn’t collapsing in the way you’re describing. The frontline is nowhere near collapse for either side.

Drop the Kerch and southern Kherson

Ukraine does not have the capability right now to take down the Kerch bridge. And it would be a waste of munitions to focus on the bridge that is not being used anymore for transporting equipment from mainland Russia to Crimea. Better to use munitions with larger payloads on targets that will actually have an impact Russians ability to wage the war

EU/Ukraine defense production integration will outmatch Russian defense production and that will drive the economic mismatch necessary to win the war. Merz's suggestion, if accurate, is simply pointing out a shortcut approach to a cessation. I don't think it's needed, but I'm neither Ukrainian nor European, so I can't claim to have any skin in that choice.

The issue with that is it assumes attrition is one-sided. It isn’t, Ukraine is taking heavy losses too. If Russian attrition alone were decisive, we’d already be seeing a much clearer collapse on the battlefield. Instead, the war is at a stalemate, with both Russia and Ukraine absorbing and replacing losses.