Save for the one or two Russia-Putin supporters who speak openly, none here I’m aware of are apologists for or support the current Russian policy in Ukraine. Stating otherwise and accusing those falsely for being on Putin’s side is cheap, junior high debate team theatrics- attempting to create an obviously false narrative.
The questions or recurring thoughts in my mind are very simple: 1) why so many would rather destroy the country than allow Trump back in the WH? 2) why ignore the history of all wars since WW1? Specifically on Russia… answer these questions: realistically, what does the end game in Ukraine look like? What happens if Putin/Russia simply says, “No, you can’t have Eastern Ukraine back”. “If you pour a trillion dollars in aid to Ukraine, we (Russia) and aligned countries will match it to a stalemate.” “If you pour a million troops into the front we will likewise match that to a stalemate.” “If you push into Mother Russia, we will nuke your ass”. Ignoring history usually carries an unintended burden of consequences. Russia/Soviet Union has already demonstrated their cultural mentality, in the plain sight of history. Look no farther back than Stalin. Estimates run as high as 12 million Russian troops were sacrificed to the front lines to stop the German advance. Let the numbers sink in… Does it really matter if that was tactically stupid or not??
In the end, how in hell would WW3 serve the vital national interests of the US? The unsupported false narrative and premise of the verbiage, “vital national interests”, is often used to support the ever increasing US involvement in the Ukraine quagmire.
I think it is excellent that you finally wish to discuss the subject of Ukraine and Russia and employ "facts." I will be happy to debate them with you however cheap and theatrical you may believe such a discussion might be.
Since I am one who has found reprehensible the behavior of much of my party with respect to the defense of Ukraine specifically and our national interests generally with respect to Russia allow me to clarify it one more time. I should note I have done so at least a dozen times previously, but those may have been ignored as mere debate team tactics.
My party, no one else, led by the imbeciles who make up the Freedom Caucus and their supporters, held up all US military aid to Ukraine for half a year. Vladimir Putin and his legions could not have carried out a more successful strategic military strike against the Ukrainian Armed Forces and its people than that. Those who supported that delay provided aid and comfort to Putin and his forces and materially aided Russia in its effort to subjugate the Ukrainian people and Russia's strategic goal to resurrect the threat posed to the West by the Soviet Union. By definition, those politicians and the people who supported them acted as Russian allies. Those are facts. Policy has consequences.
With respect to ignoring history, perhaps your finger is pointing the wrong direction. So let's review the actual performance of the Russian military since the turn of the last century. During the Russo Japanese War of 1904-05, the Russian Navy and Army were soundly defeated by Japan. During WWI 1914-17, the Russian Army, which vastly outnumbered the Central Powers committed to the Eastern Front, was defeated and forced to make a separate peace. During the Russo Polish War of 1919-21, the Polish Republic defeated the Russian host. During the Winter War of 1939-40, Finland, a far smaller nation, fought the Russian Army to bloody standstill and achieved a negotiated settlement. Finland then joined Germany in its invasion of Russia with a peace treaty with the USSR concluded in 1944. While clearly not a Finnish victory, it also did not result in the subjugation of Finland which was a Russian strategic objective. Perhaps putting the icing on that strategic failure, Finland is now a NATO member. The USSR was indeed among the victors in the Second World War, but even most Russian historians will acknowledge that was only possible due to the enormous economic and materiel support of the US, particularly from 1941-43. In Afghanistan, they failed again in spite of their overwhelming numbers. They did eventually succeed in Chechnya, but even there many historians view it as a Pyrrhic victory.
Secondly, it is a false equivalency (one of those cheap debate terms) to equate the Soviet Army and manpower resources to that of Russia. To remind, Ukraine isn't fighting the Soviet Union. In 1989, the Soviet Union had a population of 250 million people. Russia has a population of 144 million. The Soviet Union manned its forces in WWII through draconian mobilization to defend the Motherland. The little KGB thug in the Kremlin does not dare initiate general mobilization in Russian Federation - particularly in the region of the old Duchy of Moscow which includes Moscow and St. Petersburg to press the invasion of Ukraine and snuff out the right of its people to self-determination.
With respect to your imagined conversation with Putin, I think is also largely devoid of factual content. The Russian military is being defeated. They can not even exercise air superiority over their own territory much less Ukraine. Moreover, their fighters, fighter bombers, strategic bombers and the smart munitions that make them effective are being destroyed in their own bases within Russia. Their army essentially has lost all of its pre-war modernized platforms, and the majority of its experienced soldiers and leadership. There are no million troops waiting in the wings. The Black Sea Fleet was defeated and the remnants withdrawn from the Black Sea. The Russian economy is being held together by baling wire and scotch tape.
They aren't going to match expenditures either. The artificial bulwarks that the Russian government put in place in the spring of 2022 are starting to fail. As of this morning, 100 rubles will buy one dollar and nine cents. I think it is also safe to say the likes of South Africa and Venezuela are not going to save the Russian economy. It is also interesting that the Indian prime minister, holder of a major Russian economic lifeline, met with Zelensky last week.
Finally, the last thing Russia can survive is a nuclear exchange with the West. Putin and his military know this. So does China. Additionally, Putin has no assurance of the state of his own nuclear arsenal. What he can be assured of is that virtually every US and British warhead will get through and accurately strike its target and perform as designed. He also has absolute assurance that in such an exchange, however catastrophic for the West, Russia its people and its culture will cease to exist on this planet. It really isn't much of an option.
I'll add that Ukraine knows Russian military history intimately - willingly or unwillingly, they participated in much of it. It is one of the things that drives their determination to defeat Russia and its ambitions to reclaim them into servitude. I just wish this administration and my party showed a few ounces of that commitment.