Russia agreed to the Budapest Memorandum recognizing Ukraine's sovereignty as an independent state. Russia is also a party to the U.N. Charter as a founding member, and the Geneva Conventions. Those have all been torn up by Putin. So I for one choose to not believe anything he says, and find him completely untrustworthy. Any promise he signs is worthless including one to not invade Ukraine, or any other country, if they agree to stay out of NATO. Staying out of NATO is not a security guarantee so long as Putin is the one in charge. He presented not a single complaint before the U.N. about Ukraine before invading, after promising he wouldn't.

And as Putin is making it increasingly clear the stability-instability paradox may be a real and true thing, we have to consider that avoiding nuclear war at all costs itself has a cost which is that of principles. The principle being, you don't fucking roll tanks into people's backyards in contravention of the U.N. charter. The whole goddamn reason that institution exists is to prevent wars exactly like this. That it hasn't prevented it makes me question the trap we're now in: nuclear weapons are being used as a shield to permit a country to commit worse atrocities with conventional weapons than had nuclear weapons not existed, and that begs escalation all the way to a nuclear event. There is now a much bigger gap between conventional war and mutually assured destruction.

We can't go back before Putin did this. The world cannot just glibly accept what's happened as a result of fear of nukes, allowing that to make us ignore our principles. And our principles are the U.N. charter - that's the best thing that most nations agree on most of the time. There isn't anything else. If we lose that, we have nothing, and then we are certain to repeat the mistakes of WW1 and WW2.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxZlaiuicYM

Russia probably wants eastern Ukraine (and let's admit it, Donbass and Donetsk are not Ukrainian anymore since 8 years), but has no interest in occupying the western part, only in ensuring it stays neutral geopolitically.

People talking about Russia planning to invade Finland or other countries next are completely delusional. Russia is a small economy and has no chance of winning an open conflict with NATO. You may not like Putin but he's definitely not suicidal.

Putin has stated he wants to reunite former Soviet states.

Ukraine becoming more democratic and wanting to join western systems like the EU and NATO make that impossible for Putin.

Putin cannot afford a large successful Slavic democracy to be a direct comparison to the authoritarian regime he’s built. If democracy and free markets succeed in Ukraine, no amount of Putin’s propaganda will protect him from long term instability and potential overthrow by the people that have been under Russia’s corrupt yolk for 30 years.

NATO receives no benefit by standing by and letting Ukraine fall. The next fight would be on NATO soil, against a battle hardened, victory spirited aggressor. Oh, and he would know for a fact his nuclear threat worked like a charm.

Now is the time to stop Russia’s aggression once and for all, nuclear threat or not. Putin has never gotten less crazy. There is zero reason to assume a Ukrainian victory would pacify him. We will win handily against any future conflict. But why choose a harder victory tomorrow with one less ally, when we could have lasting victory today?

The problem is what if Ukraine like Turkey did something not agreeable by its NATO Members then e.g. to recover what is theirs.

But without NATO membership, the push to peace is just a stepping stone for Russia to get another piece then another piece then another piece of Ukraine land. The logic will always apply until there is no more Ukraine land.

After all, the Russia strategy to use arms not politics to take over and if successful, where is the end to this. I am not sure this wishful thinking can help.

For the longer term, I mean really long term after the death of Putin (unless cloning of emperor is viable), that is when the problem can be solved?

The actual security of Russia re: NATO is not really in question here, though you're right that he may not believe this, and we can't be sure that he does. However given the lukewarm international response to his annexation of Crimea, I'm inclined to believe the economic explanation more. He has just decided (probably correctly) that Ukraine is not a country that NATO will go to war to save.

Of course the whole situation is complicated by the fact Ukraine's borders are a product of Soviet planners who never thought it would wind up as an independent nation, but the ethnic Russian population is small and generally not prosperous. Ironically, Ukraine would probably be better off letting the separatist regions secede, but to do so would be publicly perceived as a win for Russia and thus is not permitted.

NATO is now trying to prevent escalation while still trying to help Ukraine and prevent it from being conquered. The problem is that now there's a violent and bloody stalemate. It needs to stop, but the only way to stop is for Putin to pull his forces out of Ukraine, and he's not going to do that without some very strong arguments.

But then I lost interest in the conflict and stopped following it daily like I think many others did and was able to view it from a realistic unemotive standpoint.

What is obvious like in all conflicts is that everyone will be friends again. Look at the atrocities Germany committed and Germans are now friends with everyone.

WW2 was against an evil racist ideology which had to be destroyed.

Russia is a kleptocracy run by one guy. When he dies it’s over. They will liberalize. It seems quite obvious.

A deal should have been struck to give Putin some territory. Instead we get bloodshed cheered on by the world which really has no skin in the game. It’s a spectator sport. And Ukrainian lives are being used to wear down Russia for everyone’s benefit.

Most prominently Russia claimed it won't invade Ukraine if Ukraine doesn't join NATO - Ukraine's NATO bid occured after Russia's full-scale invasion happened anyways.

Similar story with the nuclear disarmament of Ukraine.

One has to be especially gullible to trust Russia at this point.

My personal opinion is that Putin was never negotiating in good faith. He was negotiating as a stalling tactic while prepared and/or waited for the most opportune time to invade.

You can't be serious, or you think what you say is demonstration of decent human being who supports European values?

There is a major difference between Russia and Ukraine - willingness of Ukrainians to move toward European values while Russia is moving in other direction in light speed.

Worse, Putin Russia is financing political instability in Europe by directly funding both far right and far left parties. But not only founding but giving them propaganda support through social media manipulations.

There is another, strategical aspect that shows that we should really, really support Ukraine - its natural resources. If these fall into hands of Putin, he has even more control over Europe.

With Ukraine Europe can become a democratic economical power house and leave Fascist Russia into isolation and this is what Putin fears the most and this is why Ukraine must win.