Assuming you’re coming from a place of arguing in good faith, you raise an important point. We must always scrutinize the alignment of our means with the ideals of our ends. And in war, even with a just cause of repelling invaders and securing a people’s future, there is a spectrum of injustice against their people that leaders must weigh against achieving these goals. Conscription is a good example of this. War makes monsters of even the most well intentioned. However, we must consider the alternatives that appeal most to us with equal scrutiny, using history as our guide. If Zelensky surrendered at the very outset, it would have avoided this particular bloody war, but what injustice would it have incurred for the Ukranian people? If Zelensky sued for peace terms and conceded territory 2 years ago instead of leaning into conscription, what harms does it risk for the Ukranian people and their long term security using Crimea as an example? I am not qualified to say what are better choices. I just know that when a superior force invades you, the grim situation that results means that any choice you make as a leader will involve harm to your people.
If Zelensky surrendered at the very outset, it would have avoided this particular bloody war, but what injustice would it have incurred for the Ukranian people? If Zelensky sued for peace terms and conceded territory 2 years ago instead of leaning into conscription, what harms does it risk for the Ukranian people and their long term security using Crimea as an example?
The answer to these questions is obvious given that whatever deal Ukraine ends up with is going to be strictly worse than it would’ve been at the start of the war. All Zelensky accomplished was to destroy his country, and to ensure that millions of people died or had their lives ruined to achieve a worse long term outcome for Ukraine.
Assuming you’re coming from a place of arguing in good faith, you raise an important point. We must always scrutinize the alignment of our means with the ideals of our ends. And in war, even with a just cause of repelling invaders and securing a people’s future, there is a spectrum of injustice against their people that leaders must weigh against achieving these goals. Conscription is a good example of this. War makes monsters of even the most well intentioned. However, we must consider the alternatives that appeal most to us with equal scrutiny, using history as our guide. If Zelensky surrendered at the very outset, it would have avoided this particular bloody war, but what injustice would it have incurred for the Ukranian people? If Zelensky sued for peace terms and conceded territory 2 years ago instead of leaning into conscription, what harms does it risk for the Ukranian people and their long term security using Crimea as an example? I am not qualified to say what are better choices. I just know that when a superior force invades you, the grim situation that results means that any choice you make as a leader will involve harm to your people.
The answer to these questions is obvious given that whatever deal Ukraine ends up with is going to be strictly worse than it would’ve been at the start of the war. All Zelensky accomplished was to destroy his country, and to ensure that millions of people died or had their lives ruined to achieve a worse long term outcome for Ukraine.