I'm firmly anti-war so that means I'm anti-bombing as well as being anti-sanctioning.

Do you have any proposal as to what the rest of the world should do while Russia brutalizes a country it has no business in attacking? It's definitely not a "defeat them in the marketplace of ideas" kind of situation.

Killing Russian civilians isn't a solution which is why I am firmly anti-bombing and anti-sanctions.

So what is a solution?

The easiest of all positions to take.

It is the best position to take. How many civilian deaths is too much for you, if not zero?

Ignoring regime change for a minute, the two big levers EU/USA seem to have is sanctions and proxy war (by funding and equipping Ukraine). Anything else like bombings are immediately off the table due to nuclear deterrence. Not doing anything seems like the second worst possible outcome as appeasement will only lead to disaster in the inevitable follow up wars. If we take minimizing civilian casualties as the goal, is your position that equipping Ukraine and leaving Russia alone otherwise is the best option?

It is by far the weakest position to take. Your world with no aggressors is fantasy. The only person who had the choice to do nothing was Putin. Our failure to respond to him would result in many more deaths. Incidental casualties from sanctions are unfortunate, but in real life we always have make compromises.

Are you willing to die for this better world? It is strictly immoral to condemn others to death at your benefit while others must die for your gain.

If your children or siblings or parents had to die for you to live, would you choose that?

That isn't even a good attempt at a straw-man. Let's be honest, what qualifies as "my gain" in your argument here is "less death." So yeah, I'm willing to do what it takes to reduce death.

You're arguing that we should do nothing and let Putin go on his rampage unopposed, as if that will result in less death. To say that I disagree with you would be pretty redundant at this point, and you're not making good faith arguments, so I'm out.

You are making the assumption that people _must_ die. Not only that, but the people that must die should be dying because of sanctions, which means those that must die should be civilians.

The gain I mentioned was that you and your loved ones live. You and your loved ones get to enjoy a longer life with the price of other peoples loved ones dying from sanctions. You believe that's the best way forward.

People _must_ die when one country invades another with their military. That's how military invasions work.

Believe it or not, the Russian soldiers that invaded Ukraine weren't shooting paintball guns.