In what sense are we letting Putin do whatever he wants?

I mean, the EU is still announcing new sanction packages (they're on their 17th package so far), which makes it seem like a lot is being done, but on the other hand why have all these sanctions not been implemented from the start? I don't hear of the EU holding back weapons anymore, but it took literal years to get to this stage. And let's not get into how reliant Europe still is on Russia gas after four years despite renewable energy being right there, or how the EU keeps supporting (or at least condoning) US imperialism that directly compromises Ukrainian defense, as is the case in Iran, or how Hungary is allowed to hold up billions in aid to Ukraine. After four years of this the EU is still pulling punches, and there's very little indication it ever intends to stop doing so. The EU's idea of supporting Ukraine is supporting Ukraine to the extent that it doesn't compromise the bourgeois status quo (edit: recent example). Either go all in and stop the Russian invasion or force a peaceful settlement/capitulation without throwing Ukrainian and Russian lives into the blender.

It was supposed to be a three-day war, but they’ve been stuck in Donbas for four years.

It should've been a three-day war in Ukraine's favor, is my point. Spending a decade grinding Russia and Ukraine to dust against each other is the worst of both worlds.

So, again, we have on the one hand people saying "you can't attack Russia directly because it's got nukes, you have to use a proxy" and then when Russia says "Ukraine is the North Atlantic proxy" suddenly there's no memory of the previous understanding and it's actually a war solely between Russia and Ukraine and Ukraine couldn't possibly be a threat.

Keep working the two points together. In order to attack Russia, the West needs a proxy. Russia said Ukraine was a threat. Ukraine wasn't a threat, it's just Russia being crazy. We have to stop Russia, but we can't attack it directly, we need a proxy.

Around and around we go until, hopefully, you realize what it means for Ukraine to be a proxy. It would mean that the US was building logistics in the country. It would mean that the US was preparing to US Ukrainian soldiers to fight Russia. It would mean establishing lethal force under the guidance of the West within Ukrainian territory.

And what do we see? Joint Ukraine/NATO exercises beginning in the late fall of 2013. Increasing support for NATO among the right wing of Ukraine. An ascendant right wing in Ukraine spurred on by right wingers in the US. More joint NATO/Ukraine exercises, increasing in frequency, in scope, in lethality. Exercises simulating the invasion of Kaliningrad. Exercises for the interoperability of long-range missiles that would be used to attack deep into Russian territory.

Ukraine was never a threat to Russia, I agree. Ukraine was always a proxy of the West and the West was the threat to Russia. The West, using Ukraine as a proxy, was the threat, and Russia could not field a proxy in this situation, like they had when they were part of the USSR, partly because they are nowhere near as strong as the USSR and partly because this proxy is on their border and not 2 or 3 borders away. Russia had to fight this proxy war itself, directly, with its own people.

But you'll keep turning round to "but Russia is the aggressor, they invaded, Ukraine wasn't a threat" and I'll bringing you to the top of the cycle: you can't attack Russia directly because it has nukes, you have to use a proxy. Ukraine is that proxy. Russia claimed Ukraine is a proxy of the West and that this was dangerous for its national security, so it invaded. And you want to stop Russia, but you can't attack them directly, because they have nukes, so you need a proxy. Ukraine is that proxy. And Russia said Ukraine is a proxy and therefore its a threat.

Ad nauseam. I'm so tired of this thought termination, this cognitive dissonance riding on Russophobia disguised as holy righteousness disguised as a moral high ground.