WTFness at the NYT The spouse’s sharp eyes picked out a detail in a New York Times account of Ukraine’s surprise counterattack last week that sent its forces over the border into Russia: Ukrainian troops sliced easily through a thinly defended border, pushing tens of miles into Russia and shifting the narrative of the war after a glum year in which Ukraine had struggled, often in vain, to hold back Russian advances across its eastern front. By Monday, Ukraine’s commanding general had told President Volodymyr Zelensky that his troops held 390 square miles of territory in Russia’s southeastern Kursk region. Two dozen settlements were overrun. You take some of our land, Vlad? Fine, we’ll take some of yours. But that account from Monday is not what raised the wife’s ire. It was the story in Tuesday’s The Morning briefing by German Lopez on what Ukraine hoped to gain from the incursion: to “divert Russian troops from strategic locations,” to improve Ukrainian morale, to impress Washington, and “to shore up support abroad“: Kyiv has relied on aid from Western nations to defend itself. But voters in those countries are no longer as enthusiastic about supplying Ukraine with weapons. Some leaders, including Donald Trump, have suggested they want to cut off the aid. A battlefield victory against Russia, even if it’s not strategically important, could get skittish supporters back on board. “Some leaders, including Donald Trump”? And Trump is the leader of what? Which leaders want to cut off aid? Whose voters…