All Things Russia & Ukraine

[old salt]

Lots of US military forces heading to Europe for exercises, including Air National Guard F-35's & A-10 Warthogs.

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe ... 14165.html

...expect photos of A-10 Warthogs taking off & landing on Baltic state highways.

[Farfromgeneva]

Well…buh bye Finland. Enjoy being invaded in 2023 by Russia and called a bunch of nazis by a fascist POS over in Moscow while his conscripts rape and pillage your country.

Finland's leaders declare support for joining NATO

Zachary Basu

Data: NATO. Map: Thomas Oide/Axios
Finland's president and prime minister announced Thursday that they support an application for NATO membership, setting in motion a process that will culminate in the alliance's ninth enlargement since its founding in 1949.

Why it matters: Finland's membership in NATO would more than double the length of the alliance's borders with Russia. Sweden is expected to make an announcement on applying to NATO on Sunday. The transformation of Europe's security landscape is a nightmare for Vladimir Putin — but one triggered by his own decision to invade Ukraine.

What they're saying: "NATO membership would strengthen Finland’s security. As a member of NATO, Finland would strengthen the entire [defense] alliance," Finland's President Sauli Niinistö and Prime Minister Sanna Marin said in a joint statement Thursday.

"Finland must apply for NATO membership without delay. We hope that the national steps still needed to make this decision will be taken rapidly within the next few days," they added.
Asked Wednesday if Putin would view the forthcoming announcement as provocative, Niinistö said at a press conference: "My response would be that you caused this. Look at the mirror."
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters on a conference call that Russia "definitely" viewed the move as a threat and said, "NATO expansion does not make our continent more stable and secure."
The big picture: Public support for NATO membership in Finland and Sweden shot up virtually overnight after Russia invaded Ukraine, with a strong majority in both countries now in favor of joining.

Both countries have been close NATO partners for three decades, despite their official non-alignment.
But the West's refusal to send boots on the ground to defend Ukraine has underscored the difference that NATO's Article V commitment to collective defense — often hailed as "iron-clad" by President Biden — can make in a crisis.
"If Ukraine had been part of NATO before the war, there would have been no war," Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in a speech Wednesday.
Unlike Ukraine, Georgia or Bosnia and Herzegovina, whose membership aspirations have each been recognized by NATO, Finland and Sweden are expected to be admitted to the alliance relatively swiftly once they formally apply.

Finland's NATO-compatible military has a wartime strength of 280,000 and 900,000 reservists, in addition to some of the most sophisticated intelligence and cyber capabilities in Europe.
Its 800-mile border with Russia, a frontier on which two bloody wars were fought with the Soviet Union from 1939 to 1944, has helped foster a society-wide emphasis on security and "survival," according to Finnish security experts.
Sweden, meanwhile, has one of the strongest air forces in Europe, and together with Finland will dramatically bolster NATO's presence in the vulnerable Baltic region.
Between the lines: The "gray zone" period between when Finland and Sweden apply for NATO and are formally admitted is expected to give rise to heightened Russian disinformation, violations of air space and other hybrid threats.

Finnish media reports that critical infrastructure companies have been on high alert during "NATO Super Week" in anticipation of cyber attacks.
Finland and Sweden have already sought and received security assurances in anticipation of their NATO bid, including from the U.S. and U.K.
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson traveled to both countries on Wednesday to sign "historic declarations" vowing to come to their defense if they're attacked.
What to watch: The timeline for Finland and Sweden's accession will depend on how quickly each of NATO's 30 member states sign off, but the alliance will be well on its way to enlargement by the time of its crucial summit in Madrid on June 29-30.

[CU88]

How soon until the old soviet apologists here start blaming Finland for being invaded by Putin?

[Brooklyn]

I certainly am not a Soviet apologist but have to wonder why there is so much war hysteria here. Over the past decades we heard over and over again how the Soviets were hell bent on conquering the world. Then it was the Chinese. With the collapse of the Iron Curtain it was then the Jihadist-Islamic state. Then Saddam. Then Iran. Then ISIS. Now it's Putin.

Trillions of dollars poured into the military industrial complex while its stockholders reap multiple billions in monthly profits. In all that time domestic problems get side stepped. Then we are told pouring money into those problems won't solve them while more money is poured into the Pentagon.

Now another $40 billion from Congress. Meanwhile once again domestic problems go unresolved. Furthermore, border and internecine crises in Africa which are far worse than anything happening in Ukraine continue while the world looks the other way. Open your eyes, folks. Tail Gunner Joe McCarthy's conspiracy myths have always been and remain a pack of lies designed to steal your tax dollars, to put you into debt, and to keep the poor that way while enriching the wealthy. It will always be so whether you choose to believe it or not.

[MDlaxfan76]

I certainly am not a Soviet apologist but have to wonder why there is so much war hysteria here. Over the past decades we heard over and over again how the Soviets were hell bent on conquering the world. Then it was the Chinese. With the collapse of the Iron Curtain it was then the Jihadist-Islamic state. Then Saddam. Then Iran. Then ISIS. Now it's Putin.

Trillions of dollars poured into the military industrial complex while its stockholders reap multiple billions in monthly profits. In all that time domestic problems get side stepped. Then we are told pouring money into those problems won't solve them while more money is poured into the Pentagon.

Now another $40 billion from Congress. Meanwhile once again domestic problems go unresolved. Furthermore, border and internecine crises in Africa which are far worse than anything happening in Ukraine continue while the world looks the other way. Open your eyes, folks. Tail Gunner Joe McCarthy's conspiracy myths have always been and remain a pack of lies designed to steal your tax dollars, to put you into debt, and to keep the poor that way while enriching the wealthy. It will always be so whether you choose to believe it or not.

I don't think he was referring to you, but man, so tone deaf.

Putin invaded Ukraine. War crimes are being committed by the Russians.

Your railing about the military industrial complex (in light of domestic priorities unmet) is all fine and well, but you are choosing the wrong moment, the wrong war, for that point...as if what is happening isn't actually real...

[MDlaxfan76]

How soon until the old soviet apologists here start blaming Finland for being invaded by Putin?

It was part of Russia wasn't it?

[Brooklyn]

I don't think he was referring to you, but man, so tone deaf.

Putin invaded Ukraine. War crimes are being committed by the Russians.

Your railing about the military industrial complex (in light of domestic priorities unmet) is all fine and well, but you are choosing the wrong moment, the wrong war, for that point...as if what is happening isn't actually real...

No, he wasn't referring to me.

Putin's "war crimes"? "Wrong war"? The genocidal war crimes taking place in East Africa for the past 20+ years are no less benign while folks on this forum ignore them.

As for the military industrial complex, it's dissolution would be the best thing possible for the USA: your taxes would go downward, all domestic issues would be addressed and remedied, and we would be at peace.

[MDlaxfan76]

I don't think he was referring to you, but man, so tone deaf.

Putin invaded Ukraine. War crimes are being committed by the Russians.

Your railing about the military industrial complex (in light of domestic priorities unmet) is all fine and well, but you are choosing the wrong moment, the wrong war, for that point...as if what is happening isn't actually real...

No, he wasn't referring to me.

Putin's "war crimes"? "Wrong war"? The genocidal war crimes taking place in East Africa for the past 20+ years are no less benign while folks on this forum ignore them.

As for the military industrial complex, it's dissolution would be the best thing possible for the USA: your taxes would go downward, all domestic issues would be addressed and remedied, and we would be at peace.

yup, war crimes, Russia invaded neighbor...what does that mean geopolitically?
If you have nuclear weapons and are bigger and badder than your neighbor, you can destroy them, annex them without repercussions much less military resistance...

play that out...

sure, all sorts of awful, awful war crimes are committed elsewhere...and they get (largely) ignored...but geopolitical ramifications are different.

[Typical Lax Dad]

How soon until the old soviet apologists here start blaming Finland for being invaded by Putin?

It was part of Russia wasn't it?

It’s America’s fault.

[Brooklyn]

yup, war crimes, Russia invaded neighbor...what does that mean geopolitically?
If you have nuclear weapons and are bigger and badder than your neighbor, you can destroy them, annex them without repercussions much less military resistance...

play that out...

sure, all sorts of awful, awful war crimes are committed elsewhere...and they get (largely) ignored...but geopolitical ramifications are different.

Russia to use nukes to conquer nations? That's what McCarthy said decades ago. Good luck with trying to conquer France, Israel, Pakistan, China, and all those other nuclear countries. If Putin wants to conquer the world he will have to get through them before he reaches our shores. I suspect we'll have a long wait for that to happen. Meanwhile, our pals in the military industrial complex will be counting their money from all the corporate welfare they get every year.

[Farfromgeneva]

I certainly am not a Soviet apologist but have to wonder why there is so much war hysteria here. Over the past decades we heard over and over again how the Soviets were hell bent on conquering the world. Then it was the Chinese. With the collapse of the Iron Curtain it was then the Jihadist-Islamic state. Then Saddam. Then Iran. Then ISIS. Now it's Putin.

Trillions of dollars poured into the military industrial complex while its stockholders reap multiple billions in monthly profits. In all that time domestic problems get side stepped. Then we are told pouring money into those problems won't solve them while more money is poured into the Pentagon.

Now another $40 billion from Congress. Meanwhile once again domestic problems go unresolved. Furthermore, border and internecine crises in Africa which are far worse than anything happening in Ukraine continue while the world looks the other way. Open your eyes, folks. Tail Gunner Joe McCarthy's conspiracy myths have always been and remain a pack of lies designed to steal your tax dollars, to put you into debt, and to keep the poor that way while enriching the wealthy. It will always be so whether you choose to believe it or not.

I don't think he was referring to you, but man, so tone deaf.

Putin invaded Ukraine. War crimes are being committed by the Russians.

Your railing about the military industrial complex (in light of domestic priorities unmet) is all fine and well, but you are choosing the wrong moment, the wrong war, for that point...as if what is happening isn't actually real...

It’s all an abstraction but at least Brooklyn is consistent so we understand where he stands. That level of consistently is greatly lacking in many.

And I live a high vol life so if I’m saying that…

[Farfromgeneva]

I don't think he was referring to you, but man, so tone deaf.

Putin invaded Ukraine. War crimes are being committed by the Russians.

Your railing about the military industrial complex (in light of domestic priorities unmet) is all fine and well, but you are choosing the wrong moment, the wrong war, for that point...as if what is happening isn't actually real...

No, he wasn't referring to me.

Putin's "war crimes"? "Wrong war"? The genocidal war crimes taking place in East Africa for the past 20+ years are no less benign while folks on this forum ignore them.

As for the military industrial complex, it's dissolution would be the best thing possible for the USA: your taxes would go downward, all domestic issues would be addressed and remedied, and we would be at peace.

This is a russia thread. To suggest they're being ignored presumes an awful lot. Prioritization over a linear timeline is NOT equal to ignoring or avoiding

I can bring up the most random stuff but to MDs point it’s like this guys declaration:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qjE6qrYyE6Q

[MDlaxfan76]

yup, war crimes, Russia invaded neighbor...what does that mean geopolitically?
If you have nuclear weapons and are bigger and badder than your neighbor, you can destroy them, annex them without repercussions much less military resistance...

play that out...

sure, all sorts of awful, awful war crimes are committed elsewhere...and they get (largely) ignored...but geopolitical ramifications are different.

Russia to use nukes to conquer nations? That's what McCarthy said decades ago. Good luck with trying to conquer France, Israel, Pakistan, China, and all those other nuclear countries. If Putin wants to conquer the world he will have to get through them before he reaches our shores. I suspect we'll have a long wait for that to happen. Meanwhile, our pals in the military industrial complex will be counting their money from all the corporate welfare they get every year.

Nope, conquering nation doesn't need to use the tactical nukes because they are so much stronger anyway and no one comes to the weaker nation's help...why?

Because of those nukes.
Weaker nation doesn't have'em, can't threaten to up the ante, so the intimidation is always there as well...so, might as well just give up.

So, we're helping in order to prove that the nuke threat is countered by mutually assured destruction and nuclear bullies can't have carte blanche. Else, it's a green light for the aggressors to go ahead and take what they want and for everyone else to scramble to get a nuke as well as any other weapon system they can get their hands on as otherwise they'll be left out to dry...good news for the military industrial complex around the world if that happened, bad news for us all.

Hopefully, this will prove to have been such a disastrous move for Russia, other aggressors will want no part of such going forward...for at least awhile...unfortunately, the "Putins" of the world will still come along.

[old salt]

How soon until the old soviet apologists here start blaming Finland for being invaded by Putin?

It was part of Russia wasn't it?

You rah rah war enthusiasts might want to give this a little thought. There were reasons that diplomats & statesmen like Henry Kissinger used the term Finlandization in a positive way. If you are anxious for another long dangerous Cold War, which could easily go hot, then you're loving Sweden & Finland joining NATO. When I think soley in military terms, I get excited about the potential prospects. They are more capable allies than most NATO members (because they have they have defended themselves). They both have strong, competent forces who will dovetail nicely with NATO. They double the length of NATO's border with Russia (if you include allies like Ukraine & Belarus). They also bring the risk of further isolating & alienating Russia. The Russian people share Putin's paranoia about western encirclement. This will only reinforce it.

Cheer in the short term, as we weaken Russia's military & punish Putin by funding & enabling the destruction of Ukraine, the deaths of thousands & the displacement of millions, on behalf of an aspiring democracy with a compelling propaganda story but no proven record of democracy in 3 decades of independence. Have you given any thought into how this will play out ? Even if it leads to Putin's downfall, that comes with significant risk & does not guarantee an improved successor. We are plunging headlong into a dark tunnel of uncertainty.

Have you considered the long term costs of what we are signing up for, now that we have suddenly adopted Ukraine as a close ally, with no national debate or treaty. We have made them our proxy warriors in a hot war with Russia, on Russia's most vulnerable border. It is a noble undertaking, but it carries huge risk, at great cost to us. Who is going to finance arming Ukraine then rebuilding the country. Who is depleting their military war reserves ? Not our EU allies. They are already split & hedging on extending EU membership. The arms transfers are not NATO directed or proportionate. They are barely coordinated & mostly contingent upon US backfill. China is loving this. The other 2 global military superpowers are burning up their war reserves in Europe. So much for the pivot to Asia.

This is not a board game. A war of this magnitude is a failure of diplomacy. The global energy markets are in turmoil, prices are soaring. The already stressed global food supply is in jeopardy. But rah rah, we're sticking it to Putin, ...as the red stain continues to spread in the S & SE of the map of Ukraine.

[MDlaxfan76]

How soon until the old soviet apologists here start blaming Finland for being invaded by Putin?

It was part of Russia wasn't it?

You rah rah war enthusiasts might want to give this a little thought. There were reasons that diplomats & statesmen like Henry Kissinger used the term Finlandization in a positive way. If you are anxious for another long dangerous Cold War, which could easily go hot, then you're loving Sweden & Finland joining NATO. When I think soley in military terms, I get excited about the potential prospects. They are more capable allies than most NATO members (because they have they have defended themselves). They both have strong, competent forces who will dovetail nicely with NATO. They double the length of NATO's border with Russia (if you include allies like Ukraine & Belarus). They also bring the risk of further isolating & alienating Russia. The Russian people share Putin's paranoia about western encirclement. This will only reinforce it.

Cheer in the short term, as we weaken Russia's military & punish Putin by funding & enabling the destruction of Ukraine, the deaths of thousands & the displacement of millions, on behalf of an aspiring democracy with a compelling propaganda story but no proven record of democracy in 3 decades of independence. Have you given any thought into how this will play out ? Even if it leads to Putin's downfall, that comes with significant risk & does not guarantee an improved successor. We are plunging headlong into a dark tunnel of uncertainty.

Have you considered the long term costs of what we are signing up for, now that we have suddenly adopted Ukraine as a close ally, with no national debate or treaty. We have made them our proxy warriors in a hot war with Russia, on Russia's most vulnerable border. It is a noble undertaking, but it carries huge risk, at great cost to us. Who is going to finance arming Ukraine then rebuilding the country. Who is depleting their military war reserves ? Not our EU allies. They are already split & hedging on extending EU membership. The arms transfers are not NATO directed or proportionate. They are barely coordinated & mostly contingent upon US backfill. China is loving this. The other 2 global military superpowers are burning up their war reserves in Europe. So much for the pivot to Asia.

This is not a board game. A war of this magnitude is a failure of diplomacy. The global energy markets are in turmoil, prices are soaring. The already stressed global food supply is in jeopardy. But rah rah, we're sticking it to Putin, ...as the red stain continues to spread in the S & SE of the map of Ukraine.

A "failure of diplomacy".
Yes, true.

Putin's "diplomacy" was indeed a "failure".

Belarus is an "ally" of the West??? I missed that.

"western encirclement"??? When are you going to stop spouting Russian propaganda as if reality?

I don't know ANYONE, certainly not anyone on here, who is a "rah rah war enthusiast"...none of us wanted this war to happen.

The question, though, given Putin's "failure of diplomacy", is do we want Ukraine to win or to lose? Do we want Putin to win or to lose?

I know which side I'm on.

[Brooklyn]

Nope, conquering nation doesn't need to use the tactical nukes because they are so much stronger anyway and no one comes to the weaker nation's help...why?

Because of those nukes.
Weaker nation doesn't have'em, can't threaten to up the ante, so the intimidation is always there as well...so, might as well just give up.

So, we're helping in order to prove that the nuke threat is countered by mutually assured destruction and nuclear bullies can't have carte blanche. Else, it's a green light for the aggressors to go ahead and take what they want and for everyone else to scramble to get a nuke as well as any other weapon system they can get their hands on as otherwise they'll be left out to dry...good news for the military industrial complex around the world if that happened, bad news for us all.

Hopefully, this will prove to have been such a disastrous move for Russia, other aggressors will want no part of such going forward...for at least awhile...unfortunately, the "Putins" of the world will still come along.

Ukraine is known to have a few nukes at their disposal. Very highly unlikely that they will sit around and allow the Ruskies to take Kyiv when they have the option of using them.

[old salt]

A "failure of diplomacy".
Yes, true.

Putin's "diplomacy" was indeed a "failure".
...while western diplomacy was such a success in helping Ukraine develop as liberal democracy.
...by offering NATO & EU membership, while fomenting multiple internal revolutions & regime changes.

Belarus is an "ally" of the West??? I missed that.
I did not specify US or NATO allies. I said "allies" which could include Russian allies.
In this war, as a military ally, Belarus serves as Russia's W border (in fact). Freedom of movement & base for attack, transit, supply & intel.

"western encirclement"??? When are you going to stop spouting Russian propaganda as if reality?
When it ceases to be a reality. Look at a map. When you can't refute reality, call it propaganda.
You ok with Russian missiles in Cuba ?

I don't know ANYONE, certainly not anyone on here, who is a "rah rah war enthusiast"...none of us wanted this war to happen.
You have repeatedly stated that you are opposed to any outcome short of restoration of Ukraine's 2014 borders, removal of Putin, & war crimes trials. That will require a protracted war with huge costs, destruction, displacement & loss of life.

The question, though, given Putin's "failure of diplomacy", is do we want Ukraine to win or to lose? Do we want Putin to win or to lose?
Your definition of winning is not realistic. It is a dangerous overreach to pursue it.

I know which side I'm on.
The dogmatic, unattainable side.

[Typical Lax Dad]

How soon until the old soviet apologists here start blaming Finland for being invaded by Putin?

It was part of Russia wasn't it?

You rah rah war enthusiasts might want to give this a little thought. There were reasons that diplomats & statesmen like Henry Kissinger used the term Finlandization in a positive way. If you are anxious for another long dangerous Cold War, which could easily go hot, then you're loving Sweden & Finland joining NATO. When I think soley in military terms, I get excited about the potential prospects. They are more capable allies than most NATO members (because they have they have defended themselves). They both have strong, competent forces who will dovetail nicely with NATO. They double the length of NATO's border with Russia (if you include allies like Ukraine & Belarus). They also bring the risk of further isolating & alienating Russia. The Russian people share Putin's paranoia about western encirclement. This will only reinforce it.

Cheer in the short term, as we weaken Russia's military & punish Putin by funding & enabling the destruction of Ukraine, the deaths of thousands & the displacement of millions, on behalf of an aspiring democracy with a compelling propaganda story but no proven record of democracy in 3 decades of independence. Have you given any thought into how this will play out ? Even if it leads to Putin's downfall, that comes with significant risk & does not guarantee an improved successor. We are plunging headlong into a dark tunnel of uncertainty.

Have you considered the long term costs of what we are signing up for, now that we have suddenly adopted Ukraine as a close ally, with no national debate or treaty. We have made them our proxy warriors in a hot war with Russia, on Russia's most vulnerable border. It is a noble undertaking, but it carries huge risk, at great cost to us. Who is going to finance arming Ukraine then rebuilding the country. Who is depleting their military war reserves ? Not our EU allies. They are already split & hedging on extending EU membership. The arms transfers are not NATO directed or proportionate. They are barely coordinated & mostly contingent upon US backfill. China is loving this. The other 2 global military superpowers are burning up their war reserves in Europe. So much for the pivot to Asia.

This is not a board game. A war of this magnitude is a failure of diplomacy. The global energy markets are in turmoil, prices are soaring. The already stressed global food supply is in jeopardy. But rah rah, we're sticking it to Putin, ...as the red stain continues to spread in the S & SE of the map of Ukraine.

A "failure of diplomacy".
Yes, true.

Putin's "diplomacy" was indeed a "failure".

Belarus is an "ally" of the West??? I missed that.

"western encirclement"??? When are you going to stop spouting Russian propaganda as if reality?

I don't know ANYONE, certainly not anyone on here, who is a "rah rah war enthusiast"...none of us wanted this war to happen.

The question, though, given Putin's "failure of diplomacy", is do we want Ukraine to win or to lose? Do we want Putin to win or to lose?

I know which side I'm on.

And his.

[MDlaxfan76]

Nope, conquering nation doesn't need to use the tactical nukes because they are so much stronger anyway and no one comes to the weaker nation's help...why?

Because of those nukes.
Weaker nation doesn't have'em, can't threaten to up the ante, so the intimidation is always there as well...so, might as well just give up.

So, we're helping in order to prove that the nuke threat is countered by mutually assured destruction and nuclear bullies can't have carte blanche. Else, it's a green light for the aggressors to go ahead and take what they want and for everyone else to scramble to get a nuke as well as any other weapon system they can get their hands on as otherwise they'll be left out to dry...good news for the military industrial complex around the world if that happened, bad news for us all.

Hopefully, this will prove to have been such a disastrous move for Russia, other aggressors will want no part of such going forward...for at least awhile...unfortunately, the "Putins" of the world will still come along.

Ukraine is known to have a few nukes at their disposal. Very highly unlikely that they will sit around and allow the Ruskies to take Kyiv when they have the option of using them.

Known to whom???

[MDlaxfan76]

A "failure of diplomacy".
Yes, true.

Putin's "diplomacy" was indeed a "failure".
...while western diplomacy was such a success in helping Ukraine develop as liberal democracy.
...by offering NATO & EU membership, while fomenting multiple internal revolutions & regime changes.

Again, obviously the West's fault is your position? Not that Putin is a kleptocrat, authoritarian dictator that the Ukrainians realized was the least attractive 'ally' they could have?

The West should have rejected them...

Belarus is an "ally" of the West??? I missed that.
I did not specify US or NATO allies. I said "allies" which could include Russian allies.
In this war, as a military ally, Belarus serves as Russia's W border (in fact). Freedom of movement & base for attack, transit, supply & intel.

They double the length of NATO's border with Russia (if you include allies like Ukraine & Belarus).

ok, sounded like you were implying that NATO's border was with Russia...Finland and the Swedes were already allied with NATO, so how does their joining NATO double the border (if you include allies like...)

"western encirclement"??? When are you going to stop spouting Russian propaganda as if reality?
When it ceases to be a reality. Look at a map. When you can't refute reality, call it propaganda.
You ok with Russian missiles in Cuba ?

Gee, does China count as encirclement? India? Southeast Asia?

Sure, Russia is surrounded on all sides...encirclement, by those they don't control...

I don't know ANYONE, certainly not anyone on here, who is a "rah rah war enthusiast"...none of us wanted this war to happen.
You have repeatedly stated that you are opposed to any outcome short of restoration of Ukraine's 2014 borders, removal of Putin, & war crimes trials. That will require a protracted war with huge costs, destruction, displacement & loss of life.

I'm opposed? Nope, I've simply made clear that I don't think the Ukrainians should be forced, by us, to give up an inch of land or hegemony to the bully if they don't want to...and they don't want to. I'm also in agreement with holding the war criminals to account.

You apparently want us to force the Ukrainians to cede land, valuable territory and resources, to the bully and to stop whining about war crimes...under the absolutely ridiculous notion, IMO, that Putin will ever keep his word to back off at that point.

The question, though, given Putin's "failure of diplomacy", is do we want Ukraine to win or to lose? Do we want Putin to win or to lose?
Your definition of winning is not realistic. It is a dangerous overreach to pursue it.

Maybe, but let's hope you're wrong because the Ukrainians are very, very clear that they want to fight to win.

I know which side I'm on.
The dogmatic, unattainable side.

And you're on the side of appeasement.