Excellent points, but does this suggest that demands exceeds current AD personnel, which might further suggest we are much more deeply involved In Ukraine than supplying armaments and some training on the equipment we are sending over there?
Notably, almost a decade ago, a Polish Army general staff study projected that Russia was going to invade Ukraine, resulting in a large flow of refugees and the need for Poland to deploy forces into Ukraine. The Poles therefore prepared for a massive refugee flow, expanded their military and upgraded its weaponry, and added Ukrainian language and culture specialists. In effect, with a more realistic view of the future, Poland was ready.
As it was, during the Obama administration, the US and NATO did not do enough to prepare for a Russian invasion of Ukraine and were therefore caught unprepared. True to form, the US military and diplomatic establishments declined to ring the alarm because no one wanted to provoke Putin or embarrass Obama.
When Trump came in, the military got more funding and improved readiness due to his policies, but Ukraine's folly of siding with Hillary and trying to help take down Trump led to a considerable undercurrent of Trump and conservative dislike for the Ukrainian cause.
Currently, the US and NATO are providing a lot of intelligence, logistics, and battle advice to Ukraine. That is why I suggest a need for those specialists. With modern communications, the core of the US and NATO forces involved are not in country but are dispersed across Europe and the US. We are in a proxy war, with a chance to end Putin and his regime and reshape Europe's security for the better.