A few (perceptive) commentators have picked up on the close similarity between the terrible events in the Ukraine and the position of the Americans in Vietnam in the late 1960's.
You recall that the US, then as now, was engaged in trying to establish a workable, independent state.
So, South Vietnam had weaponry, aid and support given to it to try to counter-act the dominating influence of North Vietnam, which was very powerful indeed (so powerful that Mao's China considered it a threat).
But South Vietnam was only ever semi-independent. It just couldn't make the grade to a functioning state because it had to rely on US aid (and in 1967 a half a million US troops). It wasn't so much a failed state, because it had never really been a state to start with.
Ukraine has never really been independent and, during the modern era, it has been governed from Moscow.
It sucks in US aid because there is a political void, just like South Vietnam.
As with gravity, South Vietnam could not avoid the North, Ukraine cannot avoid Russia.
But what matters is that the pulverisation of South Vietnam by the North compelled Washington to negotiate with the North direct.
And the same historical logic is at work in Ukraine, indeed if negotiations are postponed much longer what remains of the Ukrainian state will collapse completely.
Direct negotiations between Washington and the RF are long overdue.
Mr H