Russia, Ukraine, and Proof That Three Wrongs Don’t Make a Right

The White House debacle between Zelensky, JD Vance, and President Trump has ignited a firestorm. Depending on who you ask, Zelensky betrayed an agreement, insulted the U.S., and tanked support for Ukraine, or President Trump proved “again” that he is an embarrassment on the world stage.

 Pundits tell us that if you don’t stand with Ukraine, you stand with Putin. Others, frustrated by the media’s history of manipulation, now question whether Putin is even a bad guy at all.

The left recently took to saying things aren’t binary. And in this case, the truth certainly isn’t.

It is possible—and necessary—to recognize that:

1. Putin is a monster responsible for brutal, unjust invasions.

2. The West enabled this crisis—by failing to deter.

3. Zelensky’s reckless behavior just made things worse.

This isn’t about picking sides. It’s recognizing—three wrongs don’t make a right.

Wrong #1: Russia’s Wars

In 2014, Russia invaded and annexed Crimea, marking the first time since World War II that a European nation unilaterally redrew borders by force. Using the pretext of “protecting ethnic Russians,” Putin deployed unmarked troops (the so-called "little green men"), seized key locations, and staged a sham referendum to justify the annexation. Ukraine, unprepared and internally divided after its 2014 political upheaval, could do nothing to stop it.

But Putin was never going to stop at Crimea.

In 2022, after years of destabilizing eastern Ukraine through pro-Russian separatist militias, he escalated to full-scale invasion. Under the guise of a “special military operation,” Russian forces crossed the border on multiple fronts, attempting a blitz on Kyiv—the Ukranian capital.

Early reports suggested Ukraine would collapse within days. Moscow’s expectation? A swift regime change, a new puppet government, and Ukraine permanently under Russian control.

That didn’t happen. Ukraine resisted fiercely. Cities that were expected to surrender—Kyiv, Kharkiv, Mykolaiv—held out. Russia’s logistics failed, their generals underestimated Ukraine, and losses mounted. The invasion that was supposed to be a 72-hour operation turned into a war of attrition. 

Ukrainians fought valiantly! But that valiance has not stemmed the staggering cost:

• Missile strikes leveled entire cities.

• Mass graves and war crimes have surfaced.

• Hundreds of thousands, dead and wounded.

• Millions of refugees.

• Ukraine’s economy shattered.

Putin chose to start two brutal invasions. Putin chose to ruin millions of lives. Putin is most assuredly, in the wrong.

Wrong #2: The West: Almost—Isn’t

When Putin invaded Crimea in 2014, the West had a choice: deter aggression or embolden it.

The West, chose to stoke the fires.

The Obama administration condemned the invasion, issued sanctions, and delivered strongly worded statements about international law. What it didn’t do was provide military aid, enforce a red line, or make Russia pay a price that would prevent future invasions. The message to Putin was clear—he can take what he wanted as long as he doesn’t move too fast.

Then, in 2022, Putin escalated. The West responded with a more coordinated effort, funneling billions in military aid to Ukraine, sanctioning Russian oligarchs, and diplomatically rallying NATO and the EU against Moscow.

This was, in my opinion, the best thing the Biden administration did. Biden’s team successfully united Europe, something that seemed impossible after years of NATO dysfunction. For once, the West moved quickly and decisively.

Unfortunately—it moved quickly and did little. Words alone, do not stop tanks.

Despite claiming Ukraine must win:

• NATO refuses to enforce a no-fly zone;

• NATO refuses to authorize strikes inside Russia;

• NATO refused to use troops of any kind.

Why? Fear of escalation.

Putin threatened nuclear war, and the West folded like my one law school buddy on poker night.

The U.S. and its allies loudly declared, “Ukraine must win!” But then immediately created a situation where Ukraine could not stop, but winning is entirely out of reach.

The consequences of this ‘almost’ have been catastrophic:

• Zelensky has promised his people their country back to its old borders.

• They continue to pour men into graves.

• The West funnels money and aid with no end in sight.

• Russia—gets to lick its wounds. Make a deal. And plan for next time.

The West was wrong. Not for threatening Putin—but because they never actually did.

Wrong #3: 02-28-25: Zelensky’s White House Blunder

Zelensky walked into the White House with a mission—secure American support, finalize a mineral rights deal, and reinforce Ukraine’s position. Instead, he lost his temper, insulted the U.S., and left with nothing.

From the start, the meeting turned hostile. Zelensky, facing mounting losses and war fatigue, lashed out at JD Vance, attacking him over America’s wavering support. When Trump intervened, Zelensky shifted his fire, calling U.S. leadership weak, accusing America of failing Ukraine, and demanding more aid.

The response? Trump didn’t budge.

Zelensky escalated. His frustration boiled over, and soon he wasn’t just criticizing policy—he was insulting the very people whose support Ukraine depended on. The shouting match ended with Zelensky either storming out or being asked to leave.

No deal. No aid. No goodwill.

And the fallout began immediately.

• Trump posted on Truth Social: "Ukraine doesn’t want peace if America is involved."

• European leaders erupted, claiming Trump humiliated the West.

• The American public, already tired of sending billions abroad, started asking: Why are we still doing this?

 Zelensky needs allies. Instead, he divides the West, angers the President, and gives Americans another reason to ask, “Why are we doing this?”

This wasn’t a diplomatic misstep. It was a disaster.

• Zelensky has promised a restored Ukraine

• Zelensky’s support at home is weak.

• Ukraine is running out of men.

• Western support is fading.

• Vladimir Putin—I imagine he is smiling profusely.

 Zelensky got mad at JD Vance’s analogy of cards. He responded, “I am not playing cards!”

 Perhaps he should. Ukraine has always held a weak hand—but in poker, that’s not the end. You play the cards you’re dealt. You don’t complain the other players didn’t give you their aces.

---

Let the Bodies Hit the Floor

Ukraine is running out of men.

For years, the world heard glowing reports of Ukraine’s resilience. But behind the headlines, the true cost of the war became impossible to ignore.

• Ukraine’s total military casualties are estimated between 200,000 and 400,000. (Sources: leaked U.S. intelligence reports, Western defense analysts)

• Mass conscription is in full effect.

• Men are being stopped at the borders and forced into service.

• Videos circulate of draft officers dragging terrified civilians into military vehicles.

At the start, Ukraine fielded motivated volunteers defending their homeland. Now, it sends whoever is left. Teenagers. Fathers. Middle-aged men pulled off the streets.

The result? Decreasing experience, diminishing morale, and a dwindling population.

Meanwhile, Zelensky keeps promising “total victory.” Every speech demands more sacrifices. Every failure is met with calls for more men, more weapons, more war.

Bullets do not care about speeches and Ukraine’s death spiral is speeding up. 

Zelensky does not want to negotiate—but at this rate, he may lose the choice.

The Lies we Tell Others. The Lies we Tell Ourselves

---

The aftermath of Zelensky’s White House disaster led to predictable, lazy arguments—excuses to avoid reckoning with reality. Some of these are made in bad faith, others are born from frustration—all of them are wrong.

1. “If you don’t support Ukraine, you’re pro-Putin.”

Since 2022, the binary argument has been beaten into the public: You either send Ukraine billions or you side with Russia. There is no middle ground. Some American politicians have even said exactly that.

Questioning how money is spent? Asking about corruption? Pointing out that the war is unwinnable? That means you love Putin.

It’s a cheap, lazy argument, but it’s effective. People don’t want to be labeled traitors or Russian sympathizers. The fear of being accused of supporting a dictator keeps many people silent—even when they know something is off.

But this war isn’t a moral purity test. You can oppose Russia’s invasion without blindly supporting Ukraine. You can want Ukraine to win without pretending Zelensky is beyond criticism. And you can acknowledge that the war is bleeding the country dry without believing it’s America’s job to dump endless money into it.

Thinking critically doesn’t make you pro-Putin. It makes you sane.

---

2. Putin only invaded because NATO threatened Russia.”

Thinking critically about Ukraine doesn’t make you pro-Putin. And thinking critically about Putin doesn’t make you a NATO apologist.

Yet somehow, people still push the absurd idea that Russia invaded Ukraine out of fear—because NATO “threatened” Moscow.

The theory suggests that Putin, terrified of Western expansion, had no choice but to launch a full-scale war. This is a myth.

For years, NATO was a mess. Underfunded, disorganized, and politically fractured.

• During Trump’s first term, he openly (and rightly) called out NATO’s dysfunction, ripping into European members for spending more on social programs than defense.

• Instead of addressing readiness, NATO members yelled about Trump’s rudeness and brought in a teenager to lecture leaders about climate change.

When Russia invaded Crimea in 2014, NATO did nothing. This NATO—is what had Vladimir Putin scared?

If your neighbor has an aggressive dog, you don’t poke it with a stick—you avoid it.

Putin’s actions haven’t strengthened Russia against NATO—they have strengthened NATO itself. Sweden and Finland—two countries which relative to their size take military spending seriously—have joined NATO. The EU even revived talk of a ‘European army.’

None of that makes Russia any safer.

Conclusion: He didn’t invade because of NATO. He invaded, to get an Empire.

---

3. “We’re playing with WW3.”

 The go-to excuse for Western inaction has been the same since 2022: If we push too hard, we risk nuclear war. If we escalate, we risk WW3.

It sounds reasonable—until you realize it’s the same fear-driven argument that lets dictators get away with anything. 

When Putin threatened nuclear war, the West folded immediately. It didn’t stop the war. It didn’t prevent escalation. It just ensured that the war dragged on indefinitely.

This logic isn’t new. In 2014, the West wagged its finger while Russia took Crimea without consequence. That didn’t prevent war—it encouraged it. In 2022, the U.S. and NATO ruled out direct military involvement—on day one.

The result? Putin sent more troops and bombed cities.

Weakness doesn’t prevent escalation—it guarantees it.

And yet, just like everything else in this war, the West’s response has been almost—but not quite.

Almost strong. Almost strategic. Almost deterrence. Almost isn’t.

Almost WW3—that’s a talking point. Hundreds of thousands dead—that’s reality.

---

4. “Maybe Putin isn’t the bad guy after all.”

 After years of watching the media lie about Trump, fabricate narratives, and manipulate public perception, it’s no surprise that some people are re-examining everything they’ve been told. If they lied about COVID, about elections, about January 6th—why wouldn’t they lie about Putin too?

It’s a fair question. And given the obsessive anti-Russia hysteria in American politics—where Putin has been blamed for everything from hacked elections to UFO conspiracies—it’s natural to wonder if maybe, just maybe, the entire narrative is exaggerated.

And, to be fair, the media probably has lied about Putin. Not in the sense that he’s innocent—but in the sense that the media lies about everything. They selectively report. They omit context. They twist facts. They exaggerate.

But here’s the thing: Putin doesn’t need media lies to be a villain.

The truth is bad enough.

Putin assassinates political rivals. His enemies don’t just lose elections—they fall out of windows, get poisoned, or end up in Siberia.

He jails journalists for reporting the wrong stories. He shuts down opposition parties before they can gain traction. He rigs elections so blatantly that there’s no serious opposition in Russia.

And, yes—he invaded Ukraine. This wasn’t a NATO false flag. This wasn’t some deep-state manipulation. Putin ordered Russian troops across the border. Putin launched the missiles. Putin turned entire cities into rubble.

 The war is real—and it was his choice.

 I blame the media for this gaining traction. Everyone they dislike is hitler or a threat to democracy. You can only cry wolf so many times before people start to wonder if there was ever a wolf at all. BUT—If the media says “water is wet,” do you assume it’s dry?

 Putin isn’t fighting the globalists, nor preserving Christian values. He isn’t an anti-woke warrior taking on the corrupt West. He’s a wannabe emperor, building an empire on corpses.

---

Three Wrongs Don’t Make a Right—Three Rights Can End a War

The past can’t be rewritten. The war happened. The mistakes were made. But three wrongs don’t have to lead to endless disaster. If the right people make the right choices, there’s still a path to something better.

Right #1: Zelensky Embraces a Deal

 Zelensky promised total victory. That’s not in the cards.

But that doesn’t mean Ukraine has to lose everything.

 A leader’s job is to get the best possible result for his people. That means accepting realistic outcomes, working with allies to negotiate with strength.

 Every war ends with a deal. Zelensky can start working towards a realistic one.

---

 Right #2: Europe Steps Up

For too long, European security has been America’s burden. Europeans enjoy social programs funded because Europe leans on American defense spending.

That has to change. European nations must invest in their own defense, take responsibility for their own security, and stop outsourcing their survival to Washington.

 If Europe wants to be taken seriously, it needs to act like a power—not America’s dependents.

---

Right #3: The Trump Administration Can Be the Bigger Man

Zelensky burned bridges in the White House. He embarrassed himself, insulted his biggest ally, and damaged Ukraine’s standing with the U.S. electorate. Trump has every reason to hold a grudge.

If America wants to stay as leader of the free world, that means leading even when there is spit on our face.

Three wrongs got us here. Three rights can get us out.

Do you have questions about this article, the author, or legal matters? Email: Info@MooreLegalCounsel.com or Jmoore@PrinceLaw.com.

---

---