> The main goal in Ukraine should be to make sure that Russia has as little benefit from their invasion as possible
But how? Is it mostly to prolong the war until Russia gets tired of spending money and resources on it?
Rather the have adopted the doctrine of "Ukraine can't lose, but Ukraine may not win". Always supplying just enough arms to keep the Ukrainian front from collapsing not to "stir up" Russia.
I watched a video recently that discussed all the grudges against the West/NATO Russia (Putin) has been holding onto since the mids 90s that makes them feel justified now.
The only thing left would be nuking. He hasn't dared and likely won't.
He has dared. Empty threats? Maybe... but that's quite the gamble to make.
On the contrary: Should Putin risk everything for some sq km of Ukrainian soil?
History tells us that appeasement is a worse gamble.
If at all possible, take back any Ukrainian territory. Reduce whatever gain they got from this invasion. But even if the current line stands, the more Russia can be made to bleed, the less it will think that war can be a net postive for them.
The main goal in Ukraine should be to make sure that Russia has as little benefit from their invasion as possible. Luckily this is effectively wholly compatible with Ukrainian goals.