That somehow the people dying are making the choice.
Yeah, the Russians!
How would I do that? Did you notice that Ukraine (and Russia) have laws against saying what you please and arrest people who say the wrong thing? Did you notice that Ukraine isn't relying on volunteers, they are rounding people up and forcing them to fight. Apparently saying "no" isn't really an option is it? Well at least not unless you simply answer with your feet by fleeing the country.
Wherever you got this information from I assure you information to the contrary is available. One side is pushing this narrative pretty hard...
You really don't get it do you? This is a contest of blood and iron. It doesn't matter what you think as a fan in the audience .
Then stop bringing up morality. Is this hard international diplomacy or morals? Come on, you cant pontificate on both ways, the word "morals" has come out of your side on his discussion 10x of mine. What you refuse to accept is your position is as just a moral one of mine. We're either both moralizing or we're both not so stop saying that pedantic bullshit and you know it's bullshit because most people talking about this aren't actually in the war.
The only reason to say this is for some virtue superiority? It's fucking useless statement, not worth the keystrokes to type out. What are we doing here?
If there is a moral argument its whether the likely outcome is worth the human cost. And you haven't made that argument. In fact you have studiously avoided it. Instead you try to pass the buck to imaginary Ukrainians with the imaginary "agency" that enables them to stop the war when they decide it isn't worth the cost. Or imaginary Russians who will suddenly achieve your level of moral enlightenment and sacrifice their interests to achieve it.
I am not making a moral argument at all because I don't think this is a moral contest. I think it is conflict of interests.
The harder argument is whether its in our interest. Your moralizing BS doesn't get us any closer to that answer because it isn't a moral decision.
Oh so easy to have both sides of the argument when you just say I'm the one moralizing and you are not. Stop saying morals already , please
If there is a moral argument its whether the likely outcome is worth the human cost. And you haven't made that argument. In fact you have studiously avoided it.
Again, ask the Ukrainians, you got got like all the literal textbook Russian talking points out there, somehow your media diet has given them to you and you refuse to believe there is another side of the story. At the very least we're both in the mud buddy.
Also generally in the scope of the world, here in America and the land of our allies I don't think it's a good practical, logistical, economical , diplomatic and yes even moral to let an autocratic dictator take over a fledgling European democracy just because he wants it and destabilize an entire region of the world and everyone food and other economic factors. Not outcome of this war achieves the justifications Putin says they want. Is it work Ukrainian lives? Again that's up to them, they can surrender and negotiate anytime they want.
There is a word for this that your position really grounds out to: appeasement. Let the dictator have 1/3 of Ukraine because he wants it and so long as he's willing to put some of his troops in harms way then he gets to have it right? Think of the children, he's just gotta be allowed to take it. Then he promises to stop. Pinky swear!