I agree that you that Putin is a dictator and that he has imperialist ambitions.

My point is that NATO did things to escalate the conflict in Ukraine because the US benefits from Ukraine being invaded. It's sad to say but it's true.

This is not me denying that Putin is fully responsible for his choice to invade and that what he's done is atrocious.

It's just that the US could have done things to deescalate and find other means to prevent Putin from invading. But the US doesn't want that, because the politicians are in the pockets of weapons manufacturers, and because the US has stealth imperialist ambitions of its own. Even if Ukraine defeats Putin (which I hope it does), they will be in debt to the US forever pretty much, because they were already in debt in a major way to the US even before the war, and instead of forgiving that debt, the financial aid the US is giving them is more like a loan, that is more debt. And when a country can't pay its debts to the US what happens? The US asks for things like: exclusive trade contracts, to put military bases in your country etc. Which will happen to Ukraine.

Who benefits from this? Certainly not the innocents dying in Ukraine.

Again this is not excusing Putin. He's 100% at fault here. Which is to say that while there are multiple bad actors, he's not "less guilty" because other people are also guilty.

So please don't try to spin this as me being pro-Putin. I'm pro-peace. Which means that while I agree at a certain point (when you're being invaded) you have to fight back to survive, the engine that keeps war going is contributed to and fed by many factors long before, decades before. And that we need to address those factors to prevent war. Rather than throw up our hands and say "the only thing that stops a bad guy with an army is a good guy with a bigger army". That's only true when you look at wars once they've already started.