Appeasement of someone like Putin is always a mistake.
So far every time the West calls his bluff he cowardly pretends nothing happened, be it HIMARS, Storm Shadow and HARM missile shipments, tank shipments, AWACS support, you name it.
He only attacked Ukraine because he hoped to win in a week, and this wouldn't have happened if the West armed Ukraine earlier. The desire not to escalate with Putin cost Europe a war.
However, this is all playing chicken. Whenever they were facing actual opposition, they backed down.
Also, are you aware of this?: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2019-09/news/us-completes-in...
As for INF, US withdrawal was a response to Russia testing infringing missiles first.
https://www.npr.org/2019/02/05/691521600/russia-pulls-out-of...
Sensational out of context drive by sound bytes from the likes of Guardian, Fox News, Twitter and video gammer subreddits are not sources - they’re click bait.
Months and months of this nonsense now.
Do you really think Solovyov and Simonyan are broadcasting it without official approval?
Show me any actual authoritative source not from social or drive-by media pointing out where the official Russian position is some kind of first strike.
NATO in a certain way is based on that as well. If it fails a single test regarding article 5 after someone challenges it, it becomes instantly worthless.
The danger as I see it currently is that the West is tired of war and it’s an opportunity for Putin to challenge NATO. Attack a small village in a Baltic state. Are Americans and Germans and the British going to risk their lives for a small village in a Baltic country? I hope they would, but I realistically don’t see it. And that one non-response would make NATO worth less than the paper the agreement was printed on.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis