Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Hindsight was 2020]

Per se you're saying something like, "You damned adequate people, get off with your promotion of adequacy! There are a lot of millions of people like Charles Manson, and we'll isolate you, we'll lock you up in a mental hospital, you damned adequate people, when we unite!"

Incorrect. I am saying that the moral standards applied by Western states are hypocritical and one-sided in order to benefit white-majority nations. And that’s why nations that don’t fit into that group should reject this moral narrative when it can and will be spun against them since they will never be in the club that claims to “own” democracy.

This commotion movement never gets track when it happens to them, so they should organize and question the entire system that is structured to facilitate their oppression through a narrative that always positions them as the “other” regardless of their actions.

No one wants to talk about ending the war, everyone’s solution is to propose more war and sending weapons instead because the goal is not really protecting lives or achieving peace, but guaranteeing a full Russian defeat (where even Crimea is returned) that they know very well that is not realistic. It’s like setting more fuel to the fire and being okay-ish with it because you’re not directly involved.

Thankfully there are emerging leaderships calling this out without accepting the hypocrisy of the western narrative that wants to validate/justify their economic (imperial) control of the world through moral argument that everyone knows is fake and opportunistic as they don’t apply those rules to themselves.

https://twitter.com/OliverStuenkel/status/1647209955185795072?cxt=HHwWgICxlcOuiN...

Don’t  commit genocide the locals doesn’t seem to be an unreasonable demand and demanding that the West stop giving Ukraine weapons isn’t leadership it’s trash tankie behavior that’s the moral equivalent of condemning someone for trying to stop an ongoing rape.

[🇺🇦 Purple 🦄 Unicorn 🇮🇱]

Medvedev today said Poland will vanish from the map.

Well, Hitler and the Nazis said the same ... and then tried to erase Poland and its people.

At least now we know what the Putin/Kremlin-mafia and 50-60% of Russians are all about.

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

Incorrect. I am saying that the moral standards applied by Western states are hypocritical and one-sided in order to benefit white-majority nations.

As a citizen of Kazakhstan, a country with a non-white majority, I would not want a country with a white majority, Russia, to destroy my city by 80-90%, as it does in Ukraine, to the sound of Putin's idiotic mantras that Russia is fighting against gays, Nazis and Satanists.

[Red Velvet]

Incorrect. I am saying that the moral standards applied by Western states are hypocritical and one-sided in order to benefit white-majority nations.

As a citizen of Kazakhstan, a country with a non-white majority, I would not want a country with a white majority, Russia, to destroy my city by 80-90%, as it does in Ukraine, to the sound of Putin's idiotic mantras that Russia is fighting against gays, Nazis and Satanists.

Of course you wouldn’t, which shows we have the same mentality regardless of different geography and opposite geopolitical context from our backgrounds! Russian shouldn’t claim others land. But putting fuel on that fire isn’t on anyone’s interest, much less using the war to validate and justify a toxic economic and political structure.

[Red Velvet]

Per se you're saying something like, "You damned adequate people, get off with your promotion of adequacy! There are a lot of millions of people like Charles Manson, and we'll isolate you, we'll lock you up in a mental hospital, you damned adequate people, when we unite!"

Incorrect. I am saying that the moral standards applied by Western states are hypocritical and one-sided in order to benefit white-majority nations. And that’s why nations that don’t fit into that group should reject this moral narrative when it can and will be spun against them since they will never be in the club that claims to “own” democracy.

This commotion movement never gets track when it happens to them, so they should organize and question the entire system that is structured to facilitate their oppression through a narrative that always positions them as the “other” regardless of their actions.

No one wants to talk about ending the war, everyone’s solution is to propose more war and sending weapons instead because the goal is not really protecting lives or achieving peace, but guaranteeing a full Russian defeat (where even Crimea is returned) that they know very well that is not realistic. It’s like setting more fuel to the fire and being okay-ish with it because you’re not directly involved.

Thankfully there are emerging leaderships calling this out without accepting the hypocrisy of the western narrative that wants to validate/justify their economic (imperial) control of the world through moral argument that everyone knows is fake and opportunistic as they don’t apply those rules to themselves.

https://twitter.com/OliverStuenkel/status/1647209955185795072?cxt=HHwWgICxlcOuiN...

Don’t  commit genocide the locals doesn’t seem to be an unreasonable demand and demanding that the West stop giving Ukraine weapons isn’t leadership it’s trash tankie behavior that’s the moral equivalent of condemning someone for trying to stop an ongoing rape.

Weren’t you telling me to cope and listen to whatever Lula said just some days ago? Lmao

Don’t try knowing more than me about the dude I voted for. I knew exactly what I wanted and I’m getting everything and more after eight years of hell.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Bolsonaro being a fascist piece of crap doesn’t mean Lula is by default good or that his position on Ukraine is disgusting. It’d be one thing if he was like “what Russia did is bad but not my problem” but his constant victim blaming of Ukraine and condemning of giving them aid is utterly trash and the fact he’ll say this but then demand Russia give everything back shows he’s doing the same route China is of talking out of both sides of his mouth depending on the audience which isn’t leadership it’s being a snake

[Storr]

This is a tweet about the US putting pressure on Orban, but since it involves sanctions on a Russian bank, it feels relevant to this thread:

rest of tweet: "...a possible next round of US sanctions - now directly targeting Orbán's circles.

Orbán's reaction? First, after spending years of defending it, he immediately threw the Russian-led bank under the bus. Then, after months of increasingly anti-American rhetorics, he suddenly realised that Hungary and the US are strong allies and share the same fundamental beliefs!

Well, this is a good reminder of the power of US sanctions, the dominance of US dollar in international finance - and how carrots and sticks work in diplomacy."

https://twitter.com/panyiszabolcs/status/1647263707418832896?s=20

[Torie]

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/price-putin-ready-pay

Question: What price is willing to pay for Ukraine?

Answer: “Putin’s only current limitation is his feeling of personal safety. Otherwise he probably would already have launched a nuclear strike on Ukraine.”

So, if you take this guy seriously, we are where we were at the beginning. Putin must die.

[CumbrianLefty]

Nobody knows what the real casualties are in Ukraine. High, on both sides, is a good guess. Anything else, especially when expressed in terms of ratios, is pure speculation. An accurate casualty ratio is something that we’ll probably have to wait until the third generation of historians are publishing their books on this conflict in the 2080s.

We had a good handle on casualties in both World Wars rather quicker than that, no?

[lfromnj]

Nobody knows what the real casualties are in Ukraine. High, on both sides, is a good guess. Anything else, especially when expressed in terms of ratios, is pure speculation. An accurate casualty ratio is something that we’ll probably have to wait until the third generation of historians are publishing their books on this conflict in the 2080s.

We had a good handle on casualties in both World Wars rather quicker than that, no?

Still don't really have an accurate measure in China,The Eastern Front took around till the 90s when their information was let out from the archives and we could use multiple sources instead of just Nazi generals to estimate the Eastern front. Western front did have mostly accurate casualties due to good record keeping.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

https://twitter.com/saintjavelin/status/1646538753656209409

[Florida Man for Crime]

No one wants to talk about ending the war, everyone’s solution is to propose more war

Yes, that is exactly what you are proposing - more war. If Ukraine has a ceasefire with Russia, given Putin's history of repeatedly attacking neighboring ex-Soviet countries and his clearly stated ideological belief that Ukraine is not a real country and doesn't deserve to exist, there is every reason to believe that Putin will simply use the downtime as an opportunity to rebuild his forces, and then try again in a few years. So if you have your way, there will indeed be more war.

Whereas if we help Ukraine enough to allow them to win a decisive victory, this is a lot less likely.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I still find it funny how it took days to find the person behind the Pentagon paper leaks but months later there is still no official culprit for Nord Steam 2 sabotage. 

The Nordstream sabotage required competence. This didn’t.

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://mobile.twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1647310677889937410

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

On the topic of casualties:

https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/1646902536362704896?s=20

I know Tucker has stupid fans but how exactly does he explain that Ukraine is suffering 7 dead to 1 Russian but they managed to pushed Russia out of Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Kherson and Russia after a year of fighting is stuck in the Donbas?

He can't: none of this is possible or remotely believable unless your sources are Russian State Media or English-speaking pro-Russian social media accounts.

He doesn't need to. If his audience was capable of a modicum of critical thought, they wouldn't be his audience.

(I'm willing to believe that maybe many decades ago, the right and the left had roughly equal distributions of credulous fools, complete nuts, average folks, and sharp cookies. But in the 21st Century, especially in America the right has a self-selection bias for people who cannot and will not think critically about anything.)

[HillGoose]

Incorrect. I am saying that the moral standards applied by Western states are hypocritical and one-sided in order to benefit white-majority nations.

bro race doesnt exist it was made up by the man to divide the sheeple

dont fall for the russki and red chinese soviet socialist propaganda !

[Florida Man for Crime]

No one wants to talk about ending the war, everyone’s solution is to propose more war and sending weapons instead because the goal is not really protecting lives or achieving peace, but guaranteeing a full Russian defeat (where even Crimea is returned) that they know very well that is not realistic. It’s like setting more fuel to the fire and being okay-ish with it because you’re not directly involved.

Perhaps you can let us know what is your take on the following situation:

Should Brazil make peace with Portugal? Should Brazil surrender and accept annexation into the renewed Portuguese empire (after all, that could save a lot of bloodshed, right)? Should Brazil give up its democracy and allow itself to be ruled by a foreign Portuguese dictator instead?



The year is 1999. Portugal is in a time of economic distress, and elects a young new leader, Valdemar Porto as President. Porto had briefly served as Prime Minister to the former Portuguese President, who had begun transitioning Portugal to Democracy in the wake of the dissolution of the Portuguese Empire as it finally lost its last colonies. In 1999, Macao was handed over to China, and some time before Portuguese troops had been forced to withdraw from Mozambique, Angola, East Timor, etc.

Basically as soon as Porto comes to power, he begins a war against separatists in the Azores (The 2nd Azores War). There had previously been a devastating war in the 1990s, the First Azores War, which had gone embarrassingly badly for Portugal, in which the capital of Ponta Delgada had been totally leveled. As shocking as it seems, many foreign intelligence services seem to believe that the Portuguese intelligence service may actually have orchestrated bombings of apartments in Portugal in which many Portuguese civilians were killed as a pretext.

Over the next few years, the economy gradually recovers and Porto's popularity increases. Valdemar Porto also begins secretly pursuing a nuclear weapons program and begins initial steps to modernize the Portuguese conventional military, which had been decaying. In 2003, to the surprise of many, he announces that Portugal has acquired nuclear weapons. Over the next decade or so, Portugal continues to increase its nuclear arsenal, until it has many hundreds of nuclear weapons by the mid 2010s.


The year is 2004. In Brazil, a Presidential election is held between a reformist candidate and a corrupt oligarchic candidate with close ties to Portugal. According to the initial official results, the corrupt oligarchic candidate has narrowly won. However, evidence emerges from international observers that the results are fraudulent, in particular in more pro-Portuguese regions in the north-east of Brazil. Mass protests erupt in Rio de Janiero. Evidence also emerges that the Portuguese government is clandestinely helping the Brazilian government to try to put down the protests. Eventually the Brazilian Supreme Court intervenes to uphold the rule of law and free and fair elections. The Supreme Court orders that another election be held. When the re-vote is held, international observers find it to be free and fair and the reformist candidate wins handily over the Portuguese-backed corrupt oligarchic candidate. The reformist candidate pledges to seek closer ties with other South American democracies, and seeks to distance Brazil from the increasingly authoritarian Portugal.

The year is 2005. Valdomar Porto argues in a speech that the dissolution of the Portuguese colonial empire was the greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century.

The year is 2006. To the shock of the world, Valdemar Porto uses radiological weapons to assassinate a former Portuguese spy in Buenos Aires, Alexander Litvinenko - just mentally change that to a Portuguese name please The Argentinian government is outraged, but doesn't do much.

The year is 2008. To the shock of the world, Valdemar Porto launches a surprise invasion of Angola. The war only lasts for 5 days, but it goes less well for Portugal than Porto had expected. It ends as a frozen conflict with Portugal propping up two regions of "separatists," South Ossgolia and Angkhazia.

The year is 2010. Brazil elects a new President,Viktor Yanukovich (insert Brazilian name). Although he is from the more pro-Portguese north-east and performs best there, he campaigns on seeking closer ties with other south American countries, in particular on the possibility of joining a "South American Union" which seeks to promote closer economic ties and cooperation among South American nations. With the election of a President who is pro-Portuguese but also pro-South American integration, there is some hope that the more pro-Portuguese and more pro-South American regions of Brazil are coming to more of a consensus.

The year is 2013 (also early 2014). Suddenly after having traveled to Portugal and having spoken to Valdemar Porto, the Brazilian President cancels the plans which he had campaigned on for Brazil to integrate more with other south American countries, and instead announces plans to seek greater economic integration with the increasingly autocratic Portugal. According to opinion polls, a large majority of Brazilians oppose this. Mass protests erupt in Rio de Janiero, as well as in other cities. The Brazilian government attempts to violently put down the protests, which up until then had been peaceful. As in 2004, there is evidence that the Portuguese government is aiding the Brazilian President in trying to put down the protests. Eventually, the Brazilian parliament proposes constitutional reforms to try to mollify the protestors. The protestors demand that the President of Brazil resign. Instead, he flees to Portugal, and in the process steals large amounts of money from the Brazilian treasury and takes it for himself. After this, with no President in the country, the Brazilian parliament impeaches. It is not clear what exactly they are supposed to do legally, because the President is still alive, but obviously not performing his duties as President. Brazilian constitution never considered the possibility that a President would flee the country. So the constitutional reforms are passed, the President is impeached, and new elections are scheduled.

The year is 2014 (starting in February). Armed men carrying Portuguese military equipment, and who speak with clear Portuguese accents, but who have no military insignia on their uniforms to identify them begin to appear in various regions in Brazil, especially in the more pro-Portuguese regions which are closest to Portugal in north-eastern Brazil. Portuguese media refers o these men as "polite people." Later they begin to be referred to as "little green men." Valdomar Porto initially adamantly denies that these men are from the Portuguese military, though later he admits this eventually. They were "just civilians going on a vacation to Brazil" and just happened to bring along some military equipment with them for their vacation.

In one region, the "little green men" are able to cleanly seize control of government buildings. A "referendum" is held, which implausibly gets 99% support for joining Portugal, and Portugal annexes this region (there are no international observers for this referendum). In two other regions, "separatists" are able to take control of some territory, but not the entire states. "Referendums" were held to declare the "independence" of these regions. Igor Girkin (insert Portuguese name), a "former" high ranking Portuguese intelligence officer, led the "separatist" militia. Mysteriously, his separatist "militia" turned out to have advanced Portuguese anti-aircraft missile systems, which were used to shoot down a Dutch commercial airline jet, killing hundreds of civilians.

In many other regions of the country, this hybrid war plan of protest-coup-separatism is unsuccessful, stopped by a combination of Brazilian police, military, and ordinary pro-Brazilian citizens. Planes (buses in the real case of Ukraine) were chartered from Portugal to bring "protesters", and many of the pro-Portuguese protesters spoke with Portuguese (not Brazilian) accents and didn't know local dialect and accidentally in some cases took over the wrong buildings because they did not have local knowledge to know which building was the city hall for example https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/04/08/protesters-storm-kharkiv-theater-thinking-it-was-city-hall-a33739. Evidence was also found that Portuguese intelligence services paid "protesters" to participate.

When the new Brazilian President was elected, he launched an "anti-terrorist operation" to take back areas of the country that were occupied. Martial law was not declared though, so the Brazilian military was strictly limited in how it could treat civilians (or "civilians" in many cases), which hampered their effectiveness at re-taking parts of the country. Gradually things escalated, the "separatists" started getting heavier military equipment like tanks and artillery mysteriously shipped in from Portugal, etc. This hybrid war went on for a while, but eventually there was an agreement for a ceasefire (The Caracas Agreements).

Throughout all of this, evidence keeps turning up that many (though not all) of the people involved, particularly in leadership positions, were either "former" Portuguese intelligence officers, "former" Portuguese military, were from Portugal rather than Brazil, etc. And there were lots of Portuguese "private military contractors" involved. And in some cases, they were even just literally open Portuguese military with identifying documents on them. Although it is also true that some were genuinely pro-Brazilian Portuguese people as well.

Throughout all of this, opinion polls showed that most people - including in the most pro-Portuguese parts of Brazil - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_pro-Russian_unrest_in_Ukraine#Public_opinion_in_Ukraine - did not support the separatists and did not support annexation into Portugal. Some did, of course, but they were a small minority. What the population in those more pro-Portuguese regions had actually supported were more things like greater regional autonomy or greater federalization of Ukraine (which the Brazilian government did actually offer).

The year is 2016. Valdemar Porto orders the Portuguese intelligence services to hack US Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's emails and to aid the candidacy of Donald Trump. Portugal also had begun interfering with democratic political processes and propping up extremist political elements in other South American countries, as well as in former colonies like Angola and Mozambique.

The year is 2018. Once again, Valdemar Porto assassinates a former Portuguese Spy who had become an Argentine citizen in Buenos Aires, Sergei Skripal (insert Portgueuse name). This time Porto's intelligence service uses the Novichok nerve agent.

The year is 2020. As COVID ravages the world, Valdemar Porto enters COVID isolation. He begins talking only to very small circle of advisors, many of whom are far right Portuguese nationalist ideologists and historians who yearn for the restoration of the Portuguese colonial empire.

The year is 2021. Valdemar Porto pens an essay, "On the Historical Unity of Portuguese and Brazilians," in which he argues that Brazil is not a real country, and doesn't really deserve to exist. According to Porto, Brazilians are really just confused wayward Portuguese, but they are one people with Portugal.

The year is 2022. Valdemar Porto launches a full scale Portuguese invasion of Brazil. I think you know what happens from here.

[Red Velvet]

Incorrect. I am saying that the moral standards applied by Western states are hypocritical and one-sided in order to benefit white-majority nations.

bro race doesnt exist it was made up by the man to divide the sheeple

dont fall for the russki and red chinese soviet socialist propaganda !

Race doesn’t exist and yet it’s the white-majority ones that are always “good” and the non-white ones that are “evil” or that don’t matter??? How do you explain this? Let’s not act the same incisive reaction would be made if Ukraine was outside Europe.

Even EU propaganda makes this clear. In this 2012 propaganda they clearly appeal to this white fear of losing space to non-white places with the symbolism of the white woman adversaries being aggressive non-white men (symbolizing China; India and Brazil). It was before 2014 so Russia wasn’t even displayed as they are the White country from the BRICS and therefore not seen as a threat back then before the Crimea thing.

That said, Russia was already an authoritarian state back then, unlike India or Brazil. The “democracy” speech is only a narrative that attempts to fabricate a justification for white countries global domination.

[Florida Man for Crime]

Race doesn’t exist and yet it’s the white-majority ones that are always “good”

No, Putin's Russia is majority white and it is not good.

If you want to stand in solidarity with non-white people, a good place to start would be to stand in solidarity with the Buryats and other non-white minorities in Russia which are being disproportionately pressed to serve in the Russian military and used as cannon fodder. They are being forced to serve and to die horribly rather than white ethnic Russians, whose lives Putin values more.

[Red Velvet]

Perhaps you can let us know what is your take on the following situation:

Should Brazil make peace with Portugal? Should Brazil surrender and accept annexation into the renewed Portuguese empire (after all, that could save a lot of bloodshed, right)? Should Brazil give up its democracy and allow itself to be ruled by a foreign Portuguese dictator instead?

Bro, I think you need context updated for 2023. If anything, it’s easier for Brazil to claim Portugal as part of Brazilian land than the opposite these days.

Either claim makes absolutely no sense though, even if hypothetical, as both are friends/brother nations with good relations, like say the US/UK are between themselves. We like to annoy each other and fight online for fun/distraction but we really love the other.

[Florida Man for Crime]

both are friends/brother nations with good relations, like say the US/UK are between themselves. We like to annoy each other and fight online for fun/distraction but we really love the other.

You are missing the point. It is a hypothetical question.

If Brazil were attacked similarly to Ukraine by a dictator, what do you think Brazil should do?

How should Brazil respond to Valdamar Porto's hybrid war of aggression? Do you think that USA for example should not help Brazil in that situation?

If you fail to take this hypothetical question seriously, then you are failing to take Ukraine's situation seriously as well. It is a serious enough situation that you owe it to yourself to think seriously about it for at least a few minutes.



We like to annoy each other and fight online for fun/distraction but we really love the other.

- which is precisely what many Ukrainians thought about Russia in the past. Until the rise of Valdamar Porto.

[Red Velvet]

both are friends/brother nations with good relations, like say the US/UK are between themselves. We like to annoy each other and fight online for fun/distraction but we really love the other.

You are missing the point. It is a hypothetical question.

If Brazil were attacked similarly to Ukraine by a dictator, what do you think Brazil should do?

How should Brazil respond to Valdamar Porto's hybrid war of aggression? Do you think that USA for example should not help Brazil in that situation?

Under a Monroe Doctrine justification? Absolutely yes, they shouldn’t do anything as they aren’t protagonists of anything. They should just stay out and not be involved in any way in favor or against anyone, unless we openly requested for their help, as secondary players.

[Florida Man for Crime]

Under a Monroe Doctrine justification?

No, under the justification that Brazil is a democracy and we cannot allow a world to exist in which authoritarian dictatorships as Portugal is in this hypothetical to simply take over democracies without consequence, especially on the grounds of nationalist neo-colonialism.

Absolutely yes, they shouldn’t do anything as they aren’t protagonists of anything. They should just stay out and not be involved in any way in favor or against anyone, unless we openly requested for their help, as secondary players.

Do you really not understand that this is exactly what Ukraine is doing? They are, in your words, "openly requesting for help."

It is not that western countries (and other countries including btw non-white countries like Japan and Pakistan and Morocco) are "intervening" by giving Ukraine support against their wishes.

If you are anti-colonialist, which seems like you want to think you are, you should definitely be opposing Putin. His project is precisely a neo-colonialist project. He wants to restore the Russian empire. That is what he wants his historical legacy to be. This is not ok for the same reasons that it would not be OK if some Portuguese leader managed to become a dictator, somehow assemble a powerful military, and try to re-establish the Portuguese empire.

Here, read this, preferably the whole essay, not just the wikipedia summary - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Historical_Unity_of_Russians_and_Ukrainians

[Hindsight was 2020]

both are friends/brother nations with good relations, like say the US/UK are between themselves. We like to annoy each other and fight online for fun/distraction but we really love the other.

You are missing the point. It is a hypothetical question.

If Brazil were attacked similarly to Ukraine by a dictator, what do you think Brazil should do?

How should Brazil respond to Valdamar Porto's hybrid war of aggression? Do you think that USA for example should not help Brazil in that situation?

Under a Monroe Doctrine justification? Absolutely yes, they shouldn’t do anything as they aren’t protagonists of anything. They should just stay out and not be involved in any way in favor or against anyone, unless we openly requested for their help, as secondary players.

But Ukraine did openly request help.

[Red Velvet]

Under a Monroe Doctrine justification?

No, under the justification that Brazil is a democracy and we cannot allow a world to exist in which authoritarian dictatorships as Portugal is in this hypothetical to simply take over democracies without consequence, especially on the grounds of nationalist neo-colonialism.

Absolutely yes, they shouldn’t do anything as they aren’t protagonists of anything. They should just stay out and not be involved in any way in favor or against anyone, unless we openly requested for their help, as secondary players.

Do you really not understand that this is exactly what Ukraine is doing? They are, in your words, "openly requesting for help."

It is not that western countries (and other countries including btw non-white countries like Japan and Pakistan and Morocco) are "intervening" by giving Ukraine support against their wishes.

If you are anti-colonialist, which seems like you want to think you are, you should definitely be opposing Putin. His project is precisely a neo-colonialist project. He wants to restore the Russian empire. That is what he wants his historical legacy to be. This is not ok for the same reasons that it would not be OK if some Portuguese leader managed to become a dictator, somehow assemble a powerful military, and try to re-establish the Portuguese empire.

Here, read this, preferably the whole essay, not just the wikipedia summary - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Historical_Unity_of_Russians_and_Ukrainians

But Russia IS an imperialist state. I don’t think you understand we’re in agreement that they’re wrong and should leave Ukraine.

However, it’s also truth that there’s a reason why US is caring to send as much help as they are and it’s certainly not out of their pure heart wanting to spread democracy around. They are getting something out of this by forcing much more European dependence on them for resources.

Which is why even people like Macron are talking about reducing economic ties with the dollar and giving some boost to the Chinese currency.

It’s also realistic IMO to say that you cannot (and shouldn’t) get everything you want as you will keep living as neighbors to Russia regardless of result and it’s on your benefit to maintain at least civil relationships with your neighbor.

Like, let’s suppose Ukraine gets everything they want and fully ~humiliates~ Russia at the cost of many many deaths on both sides. Do you really think Russia will suddenly put a not-authoritarian guy in power or will put someone much worse as a result of the defeat who can be willing to go much further to get what they want?

It’s much smarter to try to put both sides into the discussion table and try to find a middle ground solution that allows both Russia to claim some sort of victory and Ukraine to keep existing in whatever shape it’s possible to.

If Russia accepted to stop now and Ukraine was free to do anything after that (including joining NATO) while Russians keep Crimea and the land bridge they already occupied, wouldn’t this be worth it? You end the conflict sooner, saving many lives and each side gets some of what they wanted even if neither really fully gets it.

Not saying this is necessarily the ideal solution but the point of starting a peace talk between the two is precisely to define what that middle ground would be.