I suppose I was being provocative or just trying to prepare myself for the alley cat winning in November,
On Ukraine though, I think our own first lady was right a long time ago, no way will we force Russia out of the Donbas, never mind Crimea. Sorry, but I still see the likes of Chechnya, Georgia, Moldova even Ukraine (certainly the Donbas) as within Russia's legitimate self interests. Just as I would see Britain not just standing back if our own looneys took over and asked Russia to take us under their wing.
We're going off topic but something has been made of the similarity with Hitler's annexation of Austria and the Sudeten land. No comparison. Hitler knew that he had the capability to conquer Europe and if it wasn't for his crazy attack on Russia I would probably be speaking German today. Putin can have no possible ambition to do a Hitler.
Russia's control on Crimea is tenuous given the geography of the situation. It may be that Ukraine can put a foot to the neck of Crimea as a bargaining tool to get other regions back.
Ukraine hasn't been taken over by 'looneys', and Ukraine were abiding by the terms of the Budapest agreement, an agreement designed to de-escalate tensions between Russia and Ukraine. It is Russia who has repeatedly broken it. The 'looneys' are therefore in Russia.
Similarly Russia is a signatory to the NATO-Russia Founding Act, which provides a framework by which countries such as Poland, Latvia etc and yes Ukraine and Georgia can join NATO. That Act limits the troops, weapons systems that could be permanently placed placed in Ukraine as a NATO member. If Russia was concerned about Ukraine militarily, why didn't it work within that framework?
So for multiple reasons, your comparison with Britain and Ireland is invalid.
What is key is that Ukraine has genuine security in any deal, which means some sort of NATO membership, and this is a good thing.
Concern about Ukraine in NATO was a complete lie from Russia, proven by them stripping their forces from NATO borders to send to Ukraine - proof they have no real concern of a NATO invasion. And the NATO-Russia Act provides the basis by which Ukraine can join NATO without it escalating an arms race in the region.
And if it won't work within the Budapest agreement, or the NATO-Russia Founding Act ... it is entirely reasonable to ask how can Russia be trusted to negotiate in good faith and abide by the agreement other than the presence of significant Western military forces in Ukraine?