You can surely argue that it's not worth the cost in good faith, but there's no way you can describe an invasion and demands of territorial annexation as "reasonable" and still be taken seriously.
Of course Ukraine is an independent, sovereign state. Russia wasn't making that demand of Ukraine, per se (AFAICT). The demand was largely on existing NATO / EU member states to actively deny any request from Ukraine to join.
And, of course Russia would likely not acquiesce if such a demand were placed on them.
I think whether that demand is reasonable or not depends on one's perception. If one is a NATO ally or dependent, then anything that limits or reduces NATO power is a bad thing. If one is not, then demanding a buffer state between the sides seems like a middle-ground compromise from their point of view.
I'm only replying to these comments here to illustrate the importance of looking at a scenario from your opponent's point of view. Using the word "reasonable" requires context and perception. No matter how much one might disagree with the opponent, and how morally-right your side is, it's still important to do. It helps one understand their opponent's motivations and anticipated outcomes.
Well, as a citizen of one of the former buffer states, I really don't think there's a single bit of reason in that demand. I have the context and perception of living under Russian rule. Russians don't just have buffer states - they plunder them. Tens of millions of people in Ukraine have done nothing to deserve this fate and now that I'm also considered "the West" I won't let them fall into it if I can help it.
Every single nation that ever had something to do with them and was fortunate enough to leave their sphere of influence is trying its hardest to join NATO, isn't that a little telling? Perhaps Russia is not only looking for buffer, but wants more?
Apples and oranges. US is not and never was plundering Cuba, unlike Russians who plunder every single state in their sphere of influence until nothing is left. This is not about some nukes on Cuba, this is about living like a normal person and not in a corrupt, fascist despotism where you die decades prematurely and nobody cares.
The comparison makes complete sense when we speak about the roles of buffer states, which is the conversation that the parent post started.
Your off-topic complaint that distracted from that point, is that eastern imperialism was worse than western imperialism. Maybe it's true, maybe it's not [1], but it's not relevant to the subthread.
[1] It's difficult to have a meaningful conversation on this subject, because every empire of note has a long history of being smeared in shit, and spends a lot of effort indoctrinating its subjects that its brand of imperialism is way better than all the other ones.
It's not off topic at all. If somebody abuses their buffer states this much they can't have them. Perhaps there wouldn't be such opposition to the claims of reasonability of their request if the Russians treated their buffer states nicely (or at least not so badly).
Look up what the Russians did in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, Hungary etc. That's my definition. What the US did is nowhere near that. My grandmother said she preferred the Nazis to the Russians.
But one thing is to have your own problems, and entirely another thing is to be forced to have Russian problems and to have every hope for change destroyed by Russia because it's threatening their position that they built on sponsoring the corrupt people.
Consider that it was revealed that FSB has/had a massive corruption campaign in Ukraine funded with billions of US dollars per year. Let's wait with judging Ukraine until we can judge fairly.
I meant his demands that the LPR and DPR hold recognised referendums for independence, that Crimea be officially transferred back to Russia (after being arbitrarily granted to Ukraine by a Communist dictator), and Ukraine to remain neutral.
Fighting against those isn't worth hundreds of billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives. The first two will continue to be problematic even if Ukraine wins.
