That's the lie of it though, that forcing Ukraine to concede land will be 'cheaper' in the long run for the US.
Forcing Ukraine to concede land only means Russia, under Putin or his successor, will try again for more of it once they've rebuilt their forces. And next time Russia would know they can bite off chunk, destroy anything but the western embassies, and still get away with taking what they can get by just running out the western electorates attention span and perception of events.
You cannot pay school teachers or plow drivers in humvee's or HIMARs either, and if Russia gets a W out of Ukraine's hide, they won't take that as a signal not to try again in the future.
The problem here is that some people on the anti-establishment right have lost the plot and started to play with schemes and plots that require some idea about areas of politics that are beyond their interest and/or knowledge, probably both.
They have observed the left and concluded that the correct and effective way to damage the establishment, as they fight it, is fighting is to damage its global influence and stature.
Which from the left's point of sitting and objective list is accurate enough.
However, that's where they are stuck, monkey see, monkey do. They want to copy that, like parrots who don't understand what they are saying. They did not think that perhaps their objectives are different. For the left, old, progressive, even the left-liberal globalists, weakening major western powers (with special note for USA as the world's only superpower) and creating a more "multipolar world" is not an unfortunate side effect, it's not even a fortunate side effect, it's one of primary objectives objective in and of itself, they were always quite open about that, and their actions are in agreement with pursuing that goal.
But what do they achieve if they try to strike at the establishment by copying leftist "anti-militarism", isolationism, anti-warmongering, opposing NATO and all that, however you call this very old by now set of narratives, exactly like the left did in the old days?
Yes, they are pursuing the same goal the left always was. They are in a way being accelerationist too - when the left does what they are doing, they are sneaky and careful, see Obama's "managed decline" . They on the other hand are more open and radical... about pursuing the same thing for slightly different reasons.
So the question is, are they right first, are they anti-establishment first, or are they just idiots who don't know what they are doing in general?
This sort of midwittery is addressed in an old nerd joke:
Three script kiddies are buying tickets for a train. They see a group of three hackers in front of them, and they notice that the hackers bought only one ticket. They are curious and ask the hackers wtf are they doing. The hackers tell them to watch and learn.
When they boarded the train, and the train conductor was about to start checking tickets, they ran off to the toilet. There, the conductor knocked, and one of the hackers said he's sick, can't leave the toilet, and slid the ticket under the door to the conductor. When the conductor went away, they got out of the toilet and the script kiddies saw how cool that was.
Next time the script kiddies decide to copy the hackers, and so they also buy one ticket.
But they also see the three hackers again, waiting for the train without buying any tickets at all.
They are also curious, but they have their own scheme to do. So like the hackers, they boarded the train and hid in the toilet before ticket check started. Soon they hear an announcement of ticket control, and then hear knocking. They slide their ticket under the door... and its gone.
It was the hackers, who took the ticket and ran off to another toilet in another carriage.
Be careful when copying from devious people.
