I'm not just referring to what I've stated myself but everything the others have brought here. Yes I am blunt, and ineloquent in English. I've never pretended otherwise. I've spent too long in Eastern Europe and the odd sentence structures they have here to remember my 90s college courses. I'm just happy I'm not writing in broken English.
This has nothing to do with how good or bad you are at English. You agreed that Russia didn't want to advance further here:
No. Crimea and Eastern Ukraine being partitioned is appeasement. Crimea and the rail links to Russia was Putin's minimum objective for victory. Everything up to the Berlin line is his lunatic fancy.
Yet you compared it to Chamberlains appeasement, which famously failed
because it didn't stop Hitler. Hitler kept invading places afterwards. In contrast, you call this appeasement because Putin will be satisfied with what he got.
This isn't a language problem, this is a logical problem. The two points you make are in contrast with one another.
You could make this comparison to Chamberlain if you think Russia would invade a NATO country after Ukraine joins NATO and Russia got what (you say) it wanted. But you don't think that. You think that Russia will be okay with what it got, and won't invade further. That quite simply can't be compared to Chamberlain's appeasement, because Chamberlain didn't stop Hitler doing more invasions, but this would stop Putin from doing more. In fact, it's much more similar to Israel giving Sinai to Egypt in return for recognition and fairly permanent peace.
Now we could get into how I disagree with the points you make, about how in reality, getting a rail connection to Crimea is nice, but the only people calling that a victory for Russia are Russians high on Copium moving the goalposts. This is stuff where you could say we disagree on conclusions but agree on facts. But you cannot say that about your statements on appeasement, because your own statements contradict each other.
The psy-ops they run for the wokies are not small things, and the historical facts of Soviet agents in a lot of institutions means that there are legacy actors who are doing the work of Moscow and Beijing, even if some may not realize it due to naivete.
We cannot defeat the woke in the west till we remove it's roots in Moscow and Beijing.
Anything else is just mitigating symptoms, not dealing with the source of the rot.
Here, you show you understand neither threat prioritization nor how to deal with the woke problem.
All the psyops do is help wokies at home. The wokes at home will exist regardless of China or Russia, they have existed long before the rise of those nations as communist, and will exist afterwards.
As far as psyops go? Russia's attempts have little affect in comparison to the direct pressure China can put on American businesses. That you group them together shows that you actually think Russia still matters on the world stage. They are at the level of Iran 10 years from now: got nukes, got oil, a regional power, but a second/third tier power when it comes to the world stage. You are drinking Russian Hopium just the same as Russian shills do.
In contrast, China threatens something that actually matters (Taiwan), does actual direct damage to American Culture, and has an actual economy. How do you combat something like this? You don't declare war while there's a fifth column about. That would be moronic (so obviously, it's exactly what Bacle would think would be smart). Instead, you hit back
culturally. You strengthen American culture at home, and use that to bash down China. There's a reason why China wants companies to bend to the ChiCom's wishes, and it' s not that they hate America (though they do). It's that they know that if the company doesn't bow, that's America doing cultural damage to China. We've already yanked their ideology of communism from them. They only pay it lip service. The leaders there know they are riding a tiger of prosperity, and should that Tiger stop running, it will devour them.
But because of the One Child Policy,
it will stop running (and it could stop earlier also). China's on a time limit, and they know this. All the US has to do is survive 50 years, and keep its culture alive.