I strongly disagree this debate wasn't worth listening to. It's the sort of debate that should have been had months, or years ago. Interesting it was in Canada, could such a debate even be held in the US or the UK any longer? But the cons decisively won the debate. Just shows how difficult this is going to be. I don't think either side debated that well, but the emotional connection to the status of conventional thinking, the status of the two opposing the motion, was well exploited by the them - freedom vs tyranny. this conflict is just so simple, how can you not double down to protect your "freedom"?

But I am seriously inclined to think that Russia is winning. It's winning the economic war, and it's winning, slowly, the war on the ground. If we're going to talk "reality" it's a pity this reality wasn't even debated, even by the realists. That we are damaging ourselves as much as we're damaging Russia. In which case, it'll be the reality of Russia's occupation of the Donbas that will bring Ukraine to the table, stop Johnson and Biden war mongering as the reality of their stupidity dawns on their electorates as they see their own wealth and ease go down the drain. One can only hope so, or the existential consequences are do dire to not bear contemplation. That these other, non-nuclear, consequences which we are already suffering, were not part of the proposers' arguments was a major error in their preparation, among others.