Russia - threadbanned users in OP

What kind of subtleties?

I think the enclaves in the south-east would still count as a civil war. To be honest, while those self-declared republics in the Donbas existed and there was still low-level fighting, and Russia occupied a part of Ukraine's internationally-recognised territory, I never saw EU or NATO accession being on the cards for Ukraine anyway. It would have required Ukraine to act in some way, for example by ceding those territories and making a clean break of it, or going in and attempting to clear out the enemy. In either case, both these scenarios would have been better for Russia than the current one which makes them look totally paranoid and irrational, and has rendered them a pariah.

Those two are at risk of going down in history as the Russian Keitel and Jodl.

Looking at it now, should NATO have made concessions on admitting Ukraine to NATO. Russia did try the diplomatic route since 2008 but they got no assurances that Ukraine wouldn't be accepted and if they were, there would be no missiles and bases in Ukraine. You know NATO can preach their principles of their "open doors policy" but we have spent centuries doing deals to keep peace, the world is not always black or white.

Does the ordinary person in the Ukraine, really care about been in NATO, they just want to live in peace.

I keep thinking, what would the US do if Mexico allowed Russian bases and missiles on the US/Mexico border?

We have lived in peace in the western world for so long, do we have a blinkered view of how fragile it may actually be.

The Ukraine government will relocate westwards to Lviv and continue to administer free Ukraine from there. The supply lines from Poland and other European countries by then will be sufficiently strong for the Ukrainians to hold out in Western Ukraine for considerably longer.

The Belarussians are invading on the northwesternmost side near Brest allegedly, which is probably to secure that western border with Poland and intercept arms and munitions.

There probably is a point that some concessions should have been considered from December onwards. US knew they were going to invade. They warned everyone and it doesnt seem like anyone truly believed it. I know hindsight is 20/20 but Russia spent the bones of a year building up troops. December or January was probably the time to have real talks about Ukraine joining NATO. Putin may have taken a concessions/guarantees. It may have least bought more time until Putin begins to resign or even die from ill health or something.

There was a summit planned, which could have discussed this topic... where one of things that could have been discussed would be an agreement on what kinds of missiles and weapons could be stationed in bordering states Ukraine, maybe Baltic States, Belarus, Kalingrad ... if Ukraine were admitted to NATO. If that was Putin's real concern it could have been achieved by diplomacy.

The Ukranian people don't just want to live in 'peace' if peace also means subject to Russian control over which they have no say whether through puppet rulers or soldiers, anymore than the people of Poland, Hungary, Baltics etc did during the Cold War.

I'd say that's a strong possibility, and there are a number of scenarios in which it might happen:

1. Putin comes to his senses (or his rich buddies help him to do so) and decides the game isn't worth the candle and withdraws his forces, possibly with for-home-consumption claims that the "punishment incursion" against Ukraine has been successful.
2. Russian army morale collapses and the front line units melt back across the border, as in 1917.
3. Putin looks like dragging the world into nuclear war and someone at home removes him from power and withdraws the army from Ukraine.
4. Other scenarios such as the Russians stopping and hanging on as much as possible to existing territorial gains.
5. Relocation of the Ukrainian government to the west e.g. Lviv.

Victory for Ukraine doesn't have to take the form of a major battlefield defeat of Russian formations. All it takes is a Ukrainian government still in place, and/or Russian units going home. At the moment they're helping bring such an scenario about by inflicting tactical pain on the Russians, keeping the west on-side, motivating their own people and winning the propaganda war. The victory doesn't always require annihilation of the enemy, and doesn't always go to the biggest battalions.

The NATO angle is a ruse by Putin. First of all, if he takes Ukraine he ends up with more NATO nations on his border. Secondly, there was no imminent Ukraine admission into NATO. As far as I'm aware, there were no talks recently.

He's also broken the Russian promise of defending Ukraine's integrity which the Russians signed onto when the west convinced Ukraine to give up its nukes.

Putin has always deeply felt that the USSR was 'unfairly' broken up and that the countries that went their own way are still Russian. His motivation is Russian glory and power. He's knocking on 70 which is 85 in western years. He knows he doesn't have long to bring this glory to Russia, hence his ill-advised move.