The whole 'appeasement doesn't work' argument is understandable, but the only alternative is fighting and dying in the tens of millions in the vain hope that a global superpower will lose to a relatively small, fractional country plagued by instability, military incompetence, and corruption. It's also not really applicable anyway, while Russia is far more interested in security and stability than global domination.

Either way, there is the short-term solution middle ground of "let's negotiate on terms that help ensure everyone's future security (including at least some degree of denazification) to prevent further wars". Which I think is what most Hexbearians would want in terms of peace. Obviously the long-term issue is that nationstates as they exist are inherently warmongering and that cannot be stopped without fundamental change.

This clearly isn't pro-putin though it's anti-war. Those people are intentionally conflating being pro-putin with any attempt to stop the war because they are bloodthirsty liberals detached from the horror this is causing and crucially - they want the war to continue.

None of us are happy this war is happening. The position of trying to get it to end as quickly as possible through any means isn't pro-putin. It's pro-human lives.

See what I don't understand is even if this were true, how is this any different than how American liberals treat countries they illegally invade? Your literal only defense against criticism is "Whataboutism!".

You will not treat America or Americans the same for occupying Afghanistan for 20 years as you treat Russia and Russians for doing something vaguely similar with far less casualties

Let's see those links, champ