The production also increased much more than in the whole US. Basically Europe's goal was at least a million shells until the end of the year. And even when they might fall a bit short on that goal, the US -by it's own account- is still in the we can probably produce 20k per month from 2024 and onward stage of ramping up production.

the German Leopard 1 tanks currently in Ukraine are partially the second line of defense for the Bundeswehr

Yeah, that's bullshit. They had to find people (most of them many decades past their jobs in military) to even do the training because Leopard-1s were simply not a thing for a long time. The ones they are sending to Ukraine are refurbished trash sitting in some yard for decades, mostly out of Germany even.

The only still existing Leopard-1s in operation are found in Greece. Then there are engineering vehicles because they were still sufficient for their job. And when they weren't anymore (because tanks they would need to tow got too heavy) that's when Wisent1 were invented. Which is a commercially developed upgrade for Leopard-1-based engineering vehicles to improve their power to a level where they can handle modern Leopard-2s again. And before the Ukraine war there was only a single buyer: the danish army.

Two million rounds of 7.62x39, as of last year, from ammo manufacturers
not sure how much of it was in this latest US military donation

What is there to "provoke"? This is an extremely clear cut case of a violation of international law. They started a war, annexed a significant portion of the country, committed countless atrocities. Why should we act like this is somehow not a reason to wipe the current leadership off the political map?

Putin won't use nuclear weapons and he can't realistically escalate the war. Every minute we let this war drag on, kills people. Not sending the most useful weapons is just inhumane at this point.

I actually mostly agree and was being a bit sarcastic. Training on newer systems is prohibitive anyway as you mentioned. Sending personell is clearly provocative and should be avoided. I just find the argument that the military industrial complex ran out of the bullets to help is laughable.

Obviously, production increases with demand and lags it causing stockpiles to decrease until output increases. Hopefully the quoted assessment is talking about that dip and not a more serious problem.

Really though, Russia knows the US is obligated to help. They signed the memorandum too, after all. It's hard to argue with someone that does so in bad faith, but continuing aid is hardly a provocative act.

When was the last effective Javelin strike? I thought that people have shifted towards using FPV drones to target armoured vehicles instead.

2022? Russia and the US have been starting or supporting wars of aggression for decades. Opposing crimes against humanity, by force if necessary, should not be controversial even for a pacifist. History shows clearly what happens when such aggression is met with appeasement.

What solution am I too stupid to think of?

Providing military aid is a last resort and a terrible solution. The only worse solution is to give up and hand over a sovereign nation we promised to protect to a tyrant.

Would I prefer the world get their act together and sanction them until they can't function, obviously yes. I don't think that's very likely though, same as most other proposals for ending the conflict as fundamentally only Putin can end it.

Taiwan is not a NATO ally, only the US has said they are going to get involved. Also the US clearly isn't overextended given that they have no troops at all in Ukraine. It wouldn't be a war of bullets and artillery either, it's going to be ships and aircraft and missiles. None of which are committed to Ukraine.

Why would they do that when they're strategy of peaceful economic integration has been working so well?