It's irrelevant who I blame for the war.

I'll explain.

The are several interpretations of what I said. Yours among them. But I am now confirming, for the second time, that I did not mean what you think I meant.

Two other valid interpretations, which I did intend, include: (1) that the US and it's executives and diplomats are warmongers; and (2) that Ukrainian demands are for the Ukrainians alone to determine.

The war is now an historical fact. Who started it is a significant issue but is neither here nor there for the point that I'm making. I'll elaborate on that point so as to put a stop to the evident confusion.

Peace will not be reached for so long as the US seeks profits in (a) selling weapons and (b) the reconstruction of Ukraine. The longer the war and the more destruction it causes, the more profit in it for the US.

The US is interested in Ukraine only insofar as it reaps these profits. I say nothing of ordinary Americans, who are likely genuinely and rightly appalled at the war and hope for the US to end it. Unfortunately, if they hope for this, they do not know their government nor it's financial interests. That is tragic, because if they did know, they might better help to end this war and many others.

The true ends of those decision makers (in the US and in Europe, too) are clear in statements like those in the linked article. If peace was the aim, the US would not be making demands that it knows Russia will never agree to. Are Russia's demands acceptable? It's again beside the point.

The question is, what is the quickest way to end the war? The answer to that question will reveal the steps that must be taken. I struggle to see how inflammatory warmongering statements from a known warmonger state could ever be part of that answer or those steps.