>it's easier to make these criticisms in retrospect.

For what it's worth, I've been critical of our (American, subsequently western) response since the first one. Speaking as an American, our response was and still are lukewarm and thus ineffectual in declaring a firm stand against warmongering. I was heartbroken and then angry at being told how (not) valuable world peace actually was.

What Putin did was declare war against the very notion of peace, and the west fucking surrendered it in the worst way possible after preaching so passionately about peace to everyone everywhere everytime.

So by effectively promising to largely validate Putin's claimed grievances and war spoils (via his promised "deal") -- do you think the incoming US president will be acting in favor of, or against "the very notion of peace"?

Any illusions about 21st century US peace preaching should have been given up sometime in, oh, 2003-2011.

And while we concern ourselves deeply about genocide against Ukrainians and Palestinians, somewhere between 1-3 million Uyghurs have been imprisoned in China.

It sucks to finally realize it, but rhetoric has always been exactly that.