Ukraine (Mod Note & Threadbanned Users in OP)

On 1., it will weaken them economically, but this will only feed into Putins control of Russia. It will not weaken his capacity to wage war if it pushes his country into supporting wars even more.

On 2., the pre invasion "dependence" on Russia didnt stop the EU from condemning Russia, so calling it dependence is an overstatement. The way sanctions are imposed is on a sliding scale, because ultimately cutting all ties with Russia will not work.

Quite the contrary, sanctions, particularly the over the top ban everything Russian type, only hurt the Russian people, who can easily blame "the West" rather than their own government for same and boost Putins domestic control.

Insofar as it may be suggested by some that not talking tough with Russia is appeasement akin to the appeasement of Germany in the 1930s might do well to reflect on what led to and kept Hitler in power in the first place - the economic collapse.

If youre saying that the attempts to engage the Russians by increasing trade hasnt worked, its worth looking to the Russian economic collapse in the late 90s to which the Western powers ignored, and which preceded Putin coming into power on the basis that he would bring stability.

I wouldnt at all share your confidence that the EU can match Russias ability to increase their militaries, and I also dont think such an escalation is a good thing (albeit it has to be done). Sanctions hurt EU economies as well as Russia, and with so many other spending commitments for Western governments, there is an extreme reluctance to pay for it. Then you have to look at the large Russian manufacturing and industrial strength, plus massive resources, and their strengthening ties with China. Russia claims to manufacture heavy modern equipment of comparable quality (citation needed) to the USA, but at half the cost. And their soldiers wages are significantly lower than those of the EU.

I think sanctions are being imposed because the EU has no other palettable option. But I dont think they will discourage Russia in the long term.

At the end of the day, the only response to a military incursion is by a robust military defence. The support to Ukraine is far more important than sanctions.

The other thing that isnt really talked about much is this - for all the talk of this being a Russia v the West narrative, NATO must be secretly delighted with how things are going. They are relevant again, it jolted Germany into meeting its 2% and the Russians are showing that they are not as modernised as they liked to claim, and are now lockded into a forever war which will likely be worse than Iraq and Afghanistan put together.

I mean, I'm not having a go at you, but isn't that the problem? We want Russia to retreat from Ukraine in the short term, and to stop invading or threatening to invade other countries in the medium term. But there is very little we can do to stop it, short of military action. And there is no appetite to go to all out war with Russia for Ukraine. Providing defensive man portable weaponry, imposing sanctions and political condemnation are not burying our heads in the sand, but it seems quite likely that eventually Ukraine will fall.

Whether we like it or not, Putin may be forcing his position home regarding a new security arrangement. The best that can be hoped for is that if Ukraine is as costly and difficult for the Russian military as it seems to be, they will be reluctant to get involved in any other wars in the short to medium term. But that is of cold comfort to the people of Ukraine.

I just don't know what realistically can or will be done.

NATO and others are sending weapons. Not the heavy equipment that Ukraine really needs or at least wants, but effective defensive weaponry nonetheless. If NATO troops are sent in, however, it would almost certainly lead to an escalation by Russia. It could possibly be done covertly, by e.g. volunteer organisations like the Russians did in Donbas, but that isn't really in the NATO playbook and would, in any event, be of limited impact because Ukraine don't need more small arms troops they need heavy modern equipment such as anti aircraft batteries, modern jets etc. Those batteries need experienced operators and support, and the jets need pilots. So again it would be back to basically NATO countries actively getting involved in Ukraine.

I don't think anyone is happy about what is happening to Ukraine. I'm not sure what you mean though about people being happy to let Ukraine be destroyed to prevent Putin launching a nuclear strike (or at least I assume that's what you mean). Especially since in your previous posts you were rejecting the apparent suggestion that Ukraine should sue for peace to prevent itself from being destroyed.