The people responsible for this comparison are the western leaders, it's an uncomfortable comparison but we should be the one making it, otherwise, we leave the space for people with bad faith arguments and pro-Putin voices to occupy this space. For example, when you make the comparison, you get to point the difference effectively like you did in your post, a pro-Putin voice would stop at pointing out our hypocrisy but they'd end up seeming the reasonable side if we don't speak up and if we don't point the hypocrisy before they do.
The west has got it wrong on both wars, the Ukrainian conflict is the one conflict that we should win, our response should've been swift, determined and unified, all we are doing is giving the green light for Putin and the likes to do it again and again. I have been thoroughly disappointed with what we've done for Ukraine, our sanctions backfired and made the enemy stronger and our self-inflated image has been exposed to every dictator in the world, this is just the beginning and one assault of many to come.
We don't need to repeat the Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and the countless of other mistakes, we should've learned the lesson by now, but alas, whoever we elect, is a slave to military complex. We are not innocent of Netanyahu's actions, I am not a purist, there is always going to be tragedy everywhere in the world, and it's impossible to absolve them all, we're effing apes after all. But these IDF bombs are bought with our money, these children are killed with our taxes, these are our politicians. You say IDF won't listen to when our leaders but they won't even say the C word, let alone pull the levers that will effectively put Netanyahu in his place, of which there are many.
We don't have to know much to figure out that Netanyahu is blood thirsty maniac fuelled by his religious beliefs and publicly declared expansionist ambitions that preceded this war. There is no objective that can be accomplished by killing all these innocent children and women unless the objective is stealing more land, expanding the Israeli state, killing children, produce survivors that are easily radicalised after what they've been through drinking sea water and beg for their limbs to not be cut off while we're watching.
What I took issue with was "The war in Ukraine is terrible, this is so much worse", that specific comparison. At the end of the day, both will be horrific and likely Ukraine's will last for years so it's hard to compare anyway. It's just that I personally don't see the need to compare them in that respect, it can devolve into a competition of who has suffered more which distracts from the main points but other comparisons are absolutely fine. My fault if I didn't make that clear.
Specific to Ukraine, I think the West has got some things right and some wrong. Ukraine absolutely needs to win, we should support them because it's the right thing to do and the consequences of Russia winning could put other countries further in risk such as Taiwan, Georgia, Moldova, etc. Where I take my main issue is that I think we've been too slow on a number of things (months worth of stupid debates about red lines) and we've lacked in quantity (fear of diminishing our own stocks). But I do believe we are (for the most part) doing good in quality with a few exceptions. If someone went back in time 2-3 years and told me that Ukraine would receive Abrams, Challengers, Leopards, Storm Shadows, F-16s, ATACMS, HIMARS, Patriots, etc. I'd laugh in their face. But unfortunately the months worth of deliberations have cost Ukrainians lives and extended the war.
The West is too reactive instead of proactive when it comes to Russia. We should have been firmer from the beginning and unafraid to do the right thing. We should set the rules. There are no red lines other than a direct attack from us on Russia. I firmly believe that in any other scenario, Russia would be too afraid to do anything to us. We've broken dozens of Russia's so called "red-lines" but we still show fear in sending certain things (such as Taurus) because it might be used to blow Crimean Bridge. We also put rules on Ukraine that they can't use Western equipment on Russian soil. And I'm not saying Ukraine should be allowed to bomb Russian civilians but there are plenty of military targets in Russia near to the border which Ukraine isn't allowed to hit. Do I think if a Storm Shadow hit a Russian military camp in Russia that Russia would start a war with UK? Absolutely not and if they do then that's their decision, not ours, we would have never directly attacked them.
I do think that we're unified for the most part with some exceptions such as Hungary/Slovakia but our unified response is too timid, whether it's about fear of Russia's reaction or fear of depleting our stocks. If we take Greece as an example, they don't not send Ukraine a lot of stuff because they're not united with us, it's because that dickhead Erdogan keeps threatening Greece. But Turkey is providing extremely valuable support to Ukraine as well, Turkey closing the strait is extremely, tactically valuable to Ukraine. it's just that we wait too long. Most countries in the West are supporting Ukraine and are united in agreement in supporting Ukraine but the varying levels of support can wildly vary.
I believe the West should be more willing to take a hit to their military capability in order to end the war faster, there are countries which sit right next to Russia who have done more for Ukraine than some Western Europe countries in terms of what they've sent compared to what they have, they're showing more confidence than countries safe in the further West because they know Russia must be stopped at all costs.
If we're being honest, and this isn't like "yeah the West is amazing, woohoo!" but truth, the only country which threatens Europe is Russia. There is no force on Earth more powerful than the combined military might of NATO and even depleting our stocks, that would remain the case. We have a chance to remove Russia as a threat but we're scared of depleting our stocks in case...Russia attacks us...What? I mean sure, China still exists and are poking Taiwan but when was the last time that China's military was battle tested? China's soldiers have virtually zero combat experience, numbers aren't everything as Russia has shown us but even Russia has more battle experience than China. Invading Taiwan across the sea would be 20x harder than Russia's invasion of Ukraine as well and the West is more than capable of ramping up their military industries to replenish stocks.
We should and can massively ramp up on mass producing artillery and drones for Ukraine, we should send more of our internal stocks and take a hit to our military capability. We should end this war sooner rather than later. I do think Biden has done a good job for the most part as well, sent a massive amount of military equipment but I was annoyed by the whole ATACMS reluctance and then when they finally did send them, it was too late as the counteroffensive was already over, it's really America's first major fuck-up in their support to Ukraine Imho. They should send still send more of everything though.
I don't think anyone has a green light yet, that depends on if Russia actually wins and at what cost, Russia has lost of a ridiculous amount of manpower and equipment already and the war may yet last for a number of years. Even if they win, they'll never hold Ukraine in peace, they'll be constant attacks on Russians in Ukraine. I'm not sure the shitshow Russia is making of this is that appealing to anyone right now aside from people equally as insane as Putin but if the West does drop support then it will give others a playbook on how to outlast the West. My main concern is what a long war costs to Ukrainians, I believe Ukraine can still win a war of attrition but it doesn't mean I want them to have to, I want as few dead Ukrainians are possible and that's is possible if the West pulls their finger out and significantly ramps up support even if it hurts our own military.
Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 12 November 2023