History teaches what can happen when countries seek to avoid war against an aggressive country. Both the UK and France ended up at war.

Yes it does, but you have to realize that the problem isn’t my knowledge of history and the conclusions I draw from it. The problem is the knowledge of history of the electorate and what conclusions they draw from it. You lecturing me on history I already know is a complete waste of time.

Reality can change depending on the future. Suppose Putin is on the verge of victory.

So again engaging in nebulous hypotheticals.

No, the war is draining the economies of Europe because Europe is supplying Ukraine with weapons. The US is forcing Europe to pay for the weapons it supplies.

Please go and look at the actual numbers. It’s not draining anything.

Yeah, I too have learned about WW2 history.

But you’re unable to divorce hindsight from a contemporary perspective and political reality. Obviously in hindsight the UK and France should have drawn a line in the sand at the annexation of the Sudetenland. But that wasn’t obvious to everyone at the time, and those who did see it didn’t have the political capital to do anything about it. Reality isn’t a game of HOI4.

The question isn’t whether the UK and France should go fight Russia, the question is whether it’s realistic for that to happen.

You’re arguing ideal hypotheticals while ignoring reality.

The negotiations between Trump and Putin are not just theatrics. The problem is that Putin is demanding a lot and Trump presently is not willing to go that far.

It is draining the economies of Europe.

That’s complete nonsense. It’s draining the economies of exactly 2 countries, Russia and Ukraine. The rest of Europe is only hurting a little bit due to higher energy costs.

Europe has been attempting to negotiate with Putin before Trump ever entered the picture.

And the negotiations between Trump and Putin are just theatrics, nothing more.

Your proposal seems like a reasonable starting point on the face of it. But is unrealistic for several reasons.

The UK and France don’t have the political capital to threaten war on Russia. RN and Reform would likely dramatically surge in popularity.

Also Putin is obsessed with Novorossyia at a minimum and would interpret the threats of entry into the war as a bluff and try and call it.

And there are a lot of boomers still in charge who can’t accept that the Europe-US alliance has become transactional and thus unreliable.

there is no negotiating with Putin

Europe has been trying that since 2014

Do they not realize gas in Europe is not anywhere as cheap as it is in the US?

There is such a thing as security guarantees.

Which are completely useless when Russia frames territorial gains as a great victory and uses that as a propaganda tool to propel its minions into power in guarantor countries, like AfD, Reform, RN

An “agreement” under duress that includes territorial concessions. And the inhabitants of those territories will then promptly be genocided.

And then Russia will attack again when they’ve rearmed, to do the same to the rest of Ukraine.

Amazing solution.

What’s your solution then? Force Ukraine to surrender, so Russia can starve Ukrainians without them being able to shoot back?

The EU holds €200 billion of Russian money. So Russia has no choice but to pay at least that much in reparations when the war is over.

Seems like a roundabout way of giving frozen Russian assets to Ukraine