Since it was a big money scheme, no.
Ukraine did not bargain in good faith with Moscow. It was just used to try and siphon Moscow’s resources with the intent of breaking up Russia.
However, if Russia had been threatening the U.S. in similar fashion using a proxy, we would have done the very same thing, invaded that proxy nation that presented the threat directly as the proxy nation being directed by Russia.
In Russia's situation it was not just a single nation, it was a collection of nations known as NATO that was presenting the threat.
The only disappointment I have with Benz is that he didn't expand on the degree of threat that was foisted upon Russian, and no I am not a Russian apologist, I'm just stating facts.
I am not saying that I am 100% in on Ukraine. However, to your post, you say that Ukraine did not bargain in good faith? Ukraine siphon Russia’s resources? How about Russia siphoning Ukraine’s wheat, grain, other resources? Russia INVADED Ukraine. What would you want the USA to do if Canada, Mexico, Cuba and the Bahama’s all invaded Florida and the borders of the north and south? Would we want to bargain our resources, our borders with them? Maybe Mexico would want Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California back. Maybe Canada would like to annex WA state, Montana, North and South Dakota, Minnesota, Michigan, NY and Maine. Would we fight them off or “bargain” in good faith. Ukraine was a sovereign nation. This was all about Puke-tin wanting to put his old Soviet Empire back together. What surprises me is he has not renamed Russia the Soviet Union again. I remember 50 years ago, standing on that East-West German border and seeing up close and personal what the Soviet thugs were like. Vietnam taught me what communism was like. Nope, don’t think this Patriot would want to be bargaining with an invader either. Maybe Hitler might have been nicer to France, Holland, Belgium, Norway, if they has just bargained with him better.
Hold free and fair elections right now and I’d revisit my support for UKR
“Ukraine did not bargain in good faith with Moscow. It was just used to try and siphon Moscow’s resources with the intent of breaking up Russia.”
Total nonsense.
From the outset, it was a money-laundering venue for the Democrats, and quite a few Republicans too. There were never any good prospects for a gain in American national interests and absolute certainty of provoking Russia.
We are there now. We can still defeat Russia in the Ukraine, but the cost will be escalation to nuclear war. We might even "win" such a contest. That is definitely not worth the cost.
It is time for Ukraine to surrender. They lost. They can fight to the last Ukrainian, and they still have lost.
It has been an interesting testing ground for new battle tactics if you can ignore the horrendous loss of men which is the price of such tests. Drone attack forces have drastically and permanently changed the tactics of war. Generals in all armies are slowly realizing that if you can spot armored vehicles and infantry within a drone coverage area, they are dead.
Hypersonic missiles can destroy any fortification if the location is known. Precision artillery can do the same. Only the coverage areas are different.
All other factors being equal, the side that has the most men and is willing to sacrifice the most men will win. That is one old lesson about war that has never changed.
We need to cut our losses in the Ukraine war so we can get setup for the next war. There is always a next war.