I'm not here to defend the Russians, nor do I support them
I would like to see the Ukraine prevail but it just ain't gonna happen unless the US and NATO (mostly the US as always) intervenes directly.
I do not support the US going to war in Ukraine.
I do not support the US supply of weapons to keep the war in Ukraine going because we have run out of munitions and money to supply Ukraine to prop up their military and prevent the economic collapse of both the Ukraine government and economy.
Any aid we send to Ukraine should be used to bolster their negotiating posture to extract the best negotiated settlement possible for the Ukrainian people.
This is not what is happening. Instead, we are wasting our aid on the further death and destruction of the Ukraine. This waste is going to eventually end in the collapse of the Ukrainian military resulting in the defeat of Ukraine in the conflict and a total victory for Russia at worst and much worse negotiating position in peace talks at best.
Total lose - lose no matter how you slice it.
Just reality and it seem nobody in the Biden Admin or NATO is willing to face up to that reality.
I doubt that the already weak and now much more weakened by munitions depletion to Ukraine Euro component of NATO could go against Russia without massive US support and meaningful US support invites both nuclear confrontation with Russia and multi theater conflicts in Asia at a time when the US military is poorly situate for a two front European and Pacific war. Which is where we are headed if we do not change course.
Your position is similar to Ike’s during the invasion of Hungary in 1956, and to LBJ’s during the invasion of Czechoslovakia of 1968. Ditto, Reagan’s response during the imposition of martial law in Poland in 1981 and G.W.H. Bush’s response to the imposition of martial law in Romania in 1989.
Tanks were always the glue that held the Warsaw Pact together.
But, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the occasion presented itself for an expansion of NATO eastward. Something like 100 million people formerly under communist rule shifted to democracy, and today enjoy rapidly increasing standards of living and quality of life, and serve as a buffer further securing peace in central Europe. The former policy of restraint showed itself to be a very wise policy.
Now, what about Finland and Sweden joining NATO, and Ukraine, and maybe also Moldova, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan wanting to join NATO?
Repeating Gov. DeSantis, we have an interest in a sustainable peace in Europe but NOT in the exact border between Ukraine and Russia and, also, Ukraine should mostly be a matter for Europe as we (the U.S.) have obligations on our southern border and in Asia-Pacific. (Former President Trump might mean this or something like it, but hasn’t been very clear.)
The problem Ukraine presents to NATO is that it is at war with Russia, and NATO isn’t about to join into a war. There needs to be peace there before we can talk about Ukraine joining NATO.
Looking back, wouldn’t accepting the post-2014 borders and securing those borders with NATO membership have been preferable to this war? That was the Trump’s position back then, but Germany said no. Germany said it would provoke Russia (as though Russia would NOT have invaded Ukraine if we left Ukraine out). Turns out Trump was right and Germany was wrong.
https://www.cato.org/commentary/making-ukraine-nato-member-all-name#
Putin interpreted appeasement as weakness. Combine appeasement by Germany with the replacement of Trump by Biden, and the invasion of Ukraine was almost inevitable.
This brings us back to needing peace or maybe a cease fire. THEN we can consider what would make that peace sustainable.